The Queen v. Palmer. Verbatim report of the trial of William Palmer at the Central criminal court, Old Bailey, London, May 14, and following days, 1856, before Lord Campbell, Mr. Justice Cresswell, and Mr. Baron Alderson

Google

This is a digital copy of a book that was preserved for generations on library shelves before it was carefully scanned by Google as part of a project

to make the world's books discoverable online.

It has survived long enough for the copyright to expire and the book to enter the public domain. A public domain book is one that was never subject

to copyright or whose legal copyright term has expired. Whether a book is in the public domain may vary country to country. Public domain books

are our gateways to the past, representing a wealth of history, culture and knowledge that's often difficult to discover.

Marks, notations and other maiginalia present in the original volume will appear in this file - a reminder of this book's long journey from the

publisher to a library and finally to you.

Usage guidelines

Google is proud to partner with libraries to digitize public domain materials and make them widely accessible. Public domain books belong to the
public and we are merely their custodians. Nevertheless, this work is expensive, so in order to keep providing tliis resource, we liave taken steps to
prevent abuse by commercial parties, including placing technical restrictions on automated querying.
We also ask that you:

+ Make non-commercial use of the files We designed Google Book Search for use by individuals, and we request that you use these files for
personal, non-commercial purposes.

+ Refrain fivm automated querying Do not send automated queries of any sort to Google's system: If you are conducting research on machine
translation, optical character recognition or other areas where access to a large amount of text is helpful, please contact us. We encourage the
use of public domain materials for these purposes and may be able to help.

+ Maintain attributionTht GoogXt "watermark" you see on each file is essential for in forming people about this project and helping them find
additional materials through Google Book Search. Please do not remove it.

+ Keep it legal Whatever your use, remember that you are responsible for ensuring that what you are doing is legal. Do not assume that just
because we believe a book is in the public domain for users in the United States, that the work is also in the public domain for users in other
countries. Whether a book is still in copyright varies from country to country, and we can't offer guidance on whether any specific use of
any specific book is allowed. Please do not assume that a book's appearance in Google Book Search means it can be used in any manner
anywhere in the world. Copyright infringement liabili^ can be quite severe.

About Google Book Search

Google's mission is to organize the world's information and to make it universally accessible and useful. Google Book Search helps readers
discover the world's books while helping authors and publishers reach new audiences. You can search through the full text of this book on the web

at |http: //books .google .com/I

\

\.

L.L.

Cw. 0. K

THE QUEEN v, PALMER.

YERBATIM REPORT

OF

THE TRIAL

OP

WILLIAM PALMEE

AT THE

CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT, OLD BAILEY

MAY 14, AND FOLLOWING DAYS, 18

BEFORE

liORD CAMPBELL, MR. JUSTICE CRESSWELL, AND

ME. BARON ALDERSON.

TRANSCRIBED FROM THE SHORT-HAND NOTES OF MR. ANGELO BENNETT,

OF ROLLS CHAMBERS, CHANCERY LANE.

ESTEBED AT]

COPYRIGHT EDITION.

[Statioxeks' Hall.

J. ALLEN, 20, WARWICK LANE, PATERNOSTER ROW;
COCKSHAW AND YATES, HORSESHOE COURT,

LUDGATE HILL,
1856.

The right of Translation is reserved*

I r

COUVeOSL FOS THE GBOWK.

The Attorney-G«nebal>
Mr. James, Q. OL,
Mr. Bodkin,
Mr. Welsby, and
Mr. Huddleston.

COUNSEL TOR TEE PSI80NEB.

Mix Seijeant Shee, .
Mi. Qeove, Q. C,
Mr. Gray, and

Mr. KiNNEALLY.

The foUoTvihg Gentlemen were sworn on

THE jiraY.

Thomas Kkight, of Leytonstono.

RicHD. DuMBRELL, Forc Street.

Wm. Mayor, Park Street.

Wm. !Nbwman", Colcshill Street.

George Miller, Duke Street, Grosvenor Square.

George Oakshott, Ham Lane, West Ham.

Charles Bates, Borough Road.

Wm. Ecclestone, Ham Lane.

Samitel Mullett, Great Portland Street.

JouK Oyxr, Gnofiyenor Road, Pimlico.

Wm. Nash, Conduit Street.

Wm. Fletcher, Fore Street.

The prisoner, William Palmer, Surgeon, of Rugelc}-, aged 31, was
indicted for having at Rugeley, county of Stafford, on November 2l8t,'^1855,
feloniously, wilfully, and with malice aforethought, committed murder on the
person of John Parsons Cook.

riEST DAY'S TEIAL.

May 14, 1856.

The prisoner, on being called upon, pleaded Nor Gnii^Tr.

Mr. James* — Mf Lords, joj frieud Mr. SeijesBt Shee bas comnmiucated to ine his
-wish, and it is the desire of the Attoraey-Gefieral, that, if any of the jury are connected
irilh insaranoe offioes in any way, they should leare the box ; that is the wish of the pro-
aecatioii also. The offices which will be alluded to in particular will be the Prince of
Wales, the Solidtors* and General, and the Midland Counties.

Lord Campbell. — ^Everything should be done to remove even a suspicion that the trial
IS not &ir ; therefore, if there be any juryman who is connected with any insurance ofScej
without any imputation on him, he will be good enough to withdraw.

A Juror. — That merely applies to proprietors and shareholdeis, my Lord ?

Lord CijiFBEU4. — Certainly ; that is all.

The Attorne^G€ner<ti.-^MM,y it please your Lordships : Gentlemen of the Jury : — ^You
are assembled to-day to discharge the mosf solemn duty that man can be called upon to
perform, to sit is judgment, wi Jh the issue of Itle and death in your hands, upon one who
stands charg^ with the highest crime lor which man can be arraigned before a worldly
tribuoaL I am sure that 1 meed not ask your most anxious and earnest attention to sudi a
case, but there is one duty which I feel it incumbent on me to perform. The peculiar cir-
ciwastBBces of this case have given it a profound and painful interest throughout the whole
country : there is perhaps scareely a man who has not come to some conclusion upon the
issue which you are now to decide. The details have been seized upon with eager avidity
— 4ibere is soaficely a aociety in which the merits of it have not been discussed.

Grentlemen, standing here as a minister of justice, with no interest and no desire save
that justice shall be done- impartially and righteously, I feel it incumbent on me to warn
you not to allow any preoonceived opinion to operate on your judgment this dav. Your
bounden duty is to try this case aeoording to the evidence whidi shall be brought before
you, and aeoording to that .alone. You must discard from your minds anything you have
read or heard, or apy opinion you may previously have formed. 9f the evidence shall
satisfy y<ra of the prisoner's guilt, you will discharge your duty to society and to your
consciences, and the oaths you have taken, by fearlessly pronouncing your verdict accord-
ingly ; but, ifl^e evidenoe shall &il to produce that reasonable coimctien on your minds,
God forbid that the scale of justice should be inclined against the prisoner by anything
of prejudice that should be imported Into such an inquiry as this ! My duty, gentlemen,
will b« a simple one ; it will be to lay before you the facts upon which the prosecution is
iloiinded. I ask your patient attention to them ; they are somewhat of a complicated cha-
racter, — they range over a considerable period of time,' because it will be necessary, in
order to understand this case, to go back into circumstances of a somewhat antecedent
period; but this I may safeAy say, that in my conscience I believe there is not one single
fJBbct to which I am about to ask your patient attention that has not immediate and most
important bearings en the case.

Gentlemen* the prisoner at the bar, William Palmer, was by profession a medical prac-
titioner. He carried on that profession at the town of Rugeley, in Staffordshire, and did'
fo for several yeass. In later years, however, he became addicted to torf pursuits, which
greatly drew off his attention and weaned him from bis profession. During the last two
or three years, I am informed, he had made over his business, except one or two
patients immediately eonneeted with himself, to a person of the name of Thirlby, who had
£>rmeriy been his assistant, and who is now carrying on, in addition to the business of
Palmer, the business of a chemist and druggist in Rugeley. I believe Palmer's name was
fitill <»tendibly kept up, but the business had previously been transferred to Thirlby, and
Palmer himself had ceased to ipractise.

In the course of the pursuits connected with the turf he became intimate with the
man whose dea^ forms the subjectHoaatter 'of this inquiry— Mr. Parsons Cook. Now
Mr. Cook was a young man of decent family, who had originally been brought up or
intended for the profession of the law ; he was articled to a solicitor, but after a time
inheriting some property, to the extent, 1 think, of 12,000^ or 15,000^., had become dis^
inclined to a laborious profession, and betook himself also to the tuif. He kept race-
horses and he betted considerably ; and in the course of those pursuits became much
4X>nneoted and familiarly intimate with the prisoner William Palmer. It is for the
murder of ibis Mr. Parsons Cook that the prisoner stands indicted on the present occasion,
for the charge against him is that he took away that man's life by poison.

Gentlemen, it will be necessary to show you the circumstances in which the prisoner

A 2

4 TRIAL OF WILLIAM PALMER.

William Palmer was then placed, and the position in which he stood relatively to the
deceased Mr. Cook ; it will be Impossible thoroaghly to understand this case in all its
bearings without those circumstances being detailed to you ; and it will be necessary
therefore that I should bring them particularly to your attention. The case which, on
the part of the prosecution, I have to urge against Palmer, is this, — that being in desperate
circumstances, with ruin, disgrace, and punishment staring him in the face, which could
only be averted by means of money, he took advantage of his intimacy with Mr.
Cook, when Mr. Cook had become the owner of a considerable sum, to destroy him in
order to obtain possession of that sum. At the Shrewsbury races in 1855 Mr, Cook was
the owner of a considerable sum of money, as I have said before. At that time Palmer
was a mined man, and it is immediately after these races that the transaction which you
are to inquire into is alleged to have taken place. Now I shall first proceed to show you
what was the position of Palmer at that time, because out of that position, and the cir-
cumstances in which Palmer was then placed, spring as we say the motives which induced
him to commit this heinous crime. If I show upon evidence which can leave no reason-
able doubt on your minds that he committed the crime, motive becomes a matter of
secondary importance ; nevertheless in an inquiry of this kind it is natural, and it is right,
to look to see what may have been the motive by which a man has been impelled to
crime. If we find strong motives, the more readily should we be led to believe in the
probability of crime having been committed. If we find a total absence of motive, the
probability is the other way. In this case the motive will be matter of very serious con-
sideration ; and as the circumstances out of which we say the motive arises in this case
come first in the order of time, I will deal with them first, before I come to that which is
the more immediate subject-matter of our inquiry. It seems to me more convenient to
follow the chronological order of events, and I therefore wilt pursue that course.

Gentlemen, it seems that as early as the year 1853 Palmer had got into pecuniary
difficulties — he began to raise money on bills. In the year 1854 his circumstances became
worse, and he was at that time indebted to different persons in a large sum of money,
and he then had recoui*se to an expedient which it will be necessary that I should bring
before you because it has an important bearing on this case. But here, gentlemen, I am
anxious to make a preliminary observation. It will become necessary for me to detail to
you transactions involving fraud, and, what is worse, forgery,— circumstances and transac-
tions reflecting the greatest discredit on those connected with them. I am anxious, while
I feel it absolutely necessary for the elucidation of truth here that these circumstances
should be brought before you, yet that they should not have more than their fair and
legitimate effect. You must not allow them to prejudice your minds against the prisoner
with reference to that which is the real matter of inquiry here to-day. I cannot avoid
bringing them forward, but I would anxiously caution you and pray yon not to allow any
prejudice created by the history of these transactions to operate unfairly to this man's

frejudice. A man may be guilty of fraud, he may be guilty of forgery; it does not follow
e should be guilty of murder. Among the bills on which Palmer raised money in the
course of the year 1854, was a bill for 2000/., which he discounted with Mr, Padwick.
That bill bore upon it the acceptance of Palmer's mother, Mrs. Sarah Palmer ; she
was a woman and is a woman of considerable wealth ; and her acceptance being believed
to be genuine was a security on which money would be readily advanced. He forged
that acceptance, and got money upon it ; and that was, if not the beginning, at least one of
the early transactions of that nature — for there are a large series of them — in which money
was obtained by bills discounted by Palmer, with his mother's acceptances forced upon
them. I shall show you how by and by, that when that reached its climax it involved
him in a state of such peril and emergency, that — as we suggest, but it is for you to form
your own conclusions — he had recourse to a desperate expedient in order to avoid the con-
sequences which seemed imminently impending over him. He owed in the year 1854 a
very large sum of money ; on the 29th of September in that year bis wife di^d ; he had
an insurance on her life to the amount of 13,000/., and the proceeds of that insurance
were realized, and with the 13,000/. he paid off some of his most pressing liabilities. He
employed, for the purpose, with regard to a portion of those liabilities, a gentleman of the
name of Pratt, a solicitor in London, who is in the habit of discounting bills, and whose
name will be largely mixed up with the subsequent transactions I shall have to detail to
you. Mr. Pratt received for him a sum of 8000/. and disposed of it in the payment of
various liabilities on bills which were in the hands of clients of Mr. Pratt's. Mr. Wright,
a solicitor of Birmingham, who had also advanced money to the prisoner, received 5000/.
more, and thus 13,000/. of debt was disposed of; but that still left Palmer with consi-
derable liabilities, and, among others, the bill which I have mentioned of 2000/. dis-
counted by Mr. Padwick, remained unpaid.

This brings us to the close of the year 1854. In the coarse of that year he effected

FIRST DAY, Mat U, 1856. 5

another insurance in his brother's name, bnt Palmer vas a party to it, and corresponded
^iUi Mr. Pratt on the subject of effecting that insurance; and the policy for 13,000^.,
immediately it was effected, was assigned to Palmer. On the strength of that policy,
which remained in the hands of Mr. Pratt, who paid the first premium out of a bill which
he discounted for Palmer at the rate of 60 per cent, they proceeded to discount further
bills, this policy being kept as a collateral security. The bills in the whole amounted
to 12,500/. discounted in the course of that year. I find that there were two discoimted
as early as June, 1S54, which were held over from month to month to keep these bills
alive. In March, 1855, two bilU of 2000/. each were discounted, with the proceeds of
which Palmer bought two race-horses, called Nettle and Chicken ; the names of which
you will hear of again in the course of this narrative. These bills were renewed in
June ; they became due on the 28th of September and 2nd of October : they were then
renewed again, and became due on the 1st and 5th of January, 1856. On the 18th of
April, 1855, a bill was discounted for 2000/. at three months, which became due on the
22nd of July, and was renewed so as to become due on the 27th of October. On the
23rd of July a bill for 2000/., at three months, was discounted, which became due on the
25th of October. On the 9th of July a bill' for 2000/., at three months, was drawn ; that
was renewed on the 1 2th of October, and became due .on the 12th of January. On the
27th of September a bill for 1000/. was done at three months, the proceeds of which went
to pay the renewal on the two bills of 2000/. of March due in September, and the bill of
the 23rd of July which became due on the 12th of October. So that the account stood
thus; — in the month of November, when the Shrewsbury races took place, and that
pressure was put on the prisoner to which I am about to advprt, there was in Mr. Pratt's
hands a bill due on the 23rd of October for 2000/., another due on the 27th of October
for 2000/., two bills due on the 9th of November which together made 1500/., a bill
due the 10th of December for 1000/., one on the Ist of January for 2000/., on the
5th of January ,for 2000/., and on the 1 8th of January 2000/. : making in the whole
12,500/. But it seemed in July he contrived to pay 1000/., therefore there remained
due at this period in the mouth of November 11,500/., and every one of these bills bore
the forged acceptance of the prisoner's mother. You will therefore understand the
pressure which naturally and necessarily arose upon him, the pressure on the liabilities
of 11,500/., which he had not a shilling in the world to meet, and the still greater
pressure which arose from the consciousness that the moment he could no longer go on —
that his mother should be resorted to for payment — the fact of his having committed these
forgeries would at once become manifest and known, and would bring on him the
penalty of the law for that crime so committed.

Now in these transactions the deceased Mr. Cook had been but only partially
interested. I should mention, however, before I go into the further history of the case,
that the prisoner's brother died in the month of August, 1855. The life had been insured,
and the policy assigned to the prisoner for 13,000/., and he of course expected that the
proceeds of that insurance would pay off these liabilities. But, as I shall show you
presently, the office in which the insurance had been effected declined to pay, and con-
sequently there was no assistance to be derived from that source.

Gentlemen, I was about to say that Mr. Cook had been, to a certain extent, but only
to a. very limited extent, mixed up with the prisoner in these pecuniary transactions to
which I have been adverting. It seems that in the month of May, 1855, Palmer was
pressed to pay a sum of 500/. to a person of the name of Serjeant, I believe, on a bill
transaction. He had in the hands of Mr. Pratt at that time, arising from these bill
transactions, a balance «f 310/. to his credit ; and he wanted Mr. Pratt to advance the
190/. necessary to make up the 500/. Mr. Pratt declined to do that except on security,
on which Palmer offered him the acceptance of Mr. Cook, representing Mr. Cook to be a
man of substance and of good security ; and accordingly the acceptance of Mr. Cook for
200/. was sent up, and on that Mr. Pratt advanced the money. 1 believe this was the
first transaction of the kind with Mr. Cook. I do not know it has any immediate
bearing on the subject, further than this, t^at I am anxious, as far as I know, to lay
before you all the circumstances which show the relation between Palmer and Cook.
That bill of 200/., when it became due, Palmer failed to provide for, and Mr. Cook had
to provide for it himself, which he did, and the bill was paid, after having first been
dishonoured. Then in the August of that year a transaction took place, to which again
it will be necessary that I should call your particular attention ; in the August of that
year, 1855, Palmer writes to Mr. Pratt he must have 1000/. more on the next Saturday.
Mr. Pratt declined to advance the 1000/. without security, on which Mr. Palmer offered
the security of Mr. Cook's acceptance for 500/., representing him as a man of means and
wealth ; but Mr. Pratt still declined to advance the money without some more tangible
security than the mere personal security of Mr. Cook's acceptance. Now Palmer

TRIAL OF WILLIAM PALMER.

represented tllis as a transaction m wliich Mr. Cook required the money, and it may be
tliat never "wns the fact. I hare ho means of ascertaining now how that stood, but I
win give him the credit to suppose it was true, and that it was a transaction in which he
had the acquiescence of Mr. Cook for the proposals he was making to Mr. Pratt. Mr.
Cook was engaged upon the turf, sometimes winning, sometimes losing; purchasing
horses, it may perfectly well be at that thne he required this loan of 500/. as represented
by Palmer. Mr. Pratt, as 1 said before, declined t6 advance the money except upon
more available security, upon which Palmer proposed an assignment by Mr. Cook of
two race-hoTses belonging to Mr. Cook ; the one called Polestar, the horse that after-
wards won at Shrewsbury races, and the other called Sinus ; and an assignment was
accordingly prepared : this assignment was afterwards executed by Mr. Cook, in favour
of Mr. Pratty as a collateral security for this sum of 500/. Now that being so, on this
representation Mr. Cook was entitled to the money, that is to say, to so much money as
could be realised upon the security. The whole of that 500/. was not to be paid on the
terms on which Mr. Pratt advanced money ; the arrangement wus that Mr. Pratt should
give for the acceptance of 500/. at three months, and the assignment of these two horses,
a sum of 375/. in money, a wine-warrant for 65/. (of course, I need not tell you, never
realised), discount for three months on the amount for which it was nominally given,
50/., and expenses 10/., making in the whole 500/. Now at all events Mr. Cook was
entitled to the 375/. in cash, and the wine-warrant for 65/. Palmer contrived that the
cheque and the wino-warrant should be sent to him, and not sent to Mr. Cook ; he wrote
to Mr. Pratt, desiring that Mr. Pratt would forward them to him at the Post-office,
Doncaster, as he was there to see Mr. Cook. He was not to see Mr. Cook there, for Mr.
Cook was not there ; but by these means Palmer got the cheque and the wine- warrant
into his own hands. Mr. Pratt sent down this cheque, which was on his banker's in
London, in this form : — sending it to a man in the country, he sent it on a stamp, as the
Act of Parliament requires. He affixed to the face of the cheque a receipt stamp, and
availed himself of the opportunity now afforded by the law, of striking out the word
" bearer," and writing " order." The effect of this was, as you are all no doubt aware,
to necessitate the endoi-sement of Mr. Cook upon the back of the cheque or order. It
was not intended by Palmer that these proceeds should find their way into Mr. Cook's-
hands, and accordingly he forged the name of " John Parsons Cook " on the back of that
cheque. He then paid the cheque into his banker's at Rugeley : the proceeds were
realised, paid by the bankers in London, and went to the credit of Palmer, who had the
advantage of the cash. Mr. Cook never had the money, and you will see that' about the
period to which I am referring, when Mr. Cook came to. his end, this bill, which was a
bill at three months, in respect of these transactions of September 10, was becoming due-
it would be due in the course of ten days; and when it became due it would appear
Palmer had had the mon^y, and that, in order to get the money which ought to have
come to Mr. Cook, he had forged the endorsement of Mr. Cook on this cheque.

Gentlemen, I wish this was the only transaction in which Mr. Cook had been mixed
up with thd4)risoner Palmer; but there is another to which it is necessary to refer.
In the September of 1855, Palmer's brother having died, but the profits of the insui*ance
not having been realized, he induced a person of the name of Bates to propose his life to
be insured, or rather he iuduced Batrs to do this. He had succeeded in raising money
on former insurances, and I have no doubt he pressed or induced Mr. Cook to assist him
in this transaction with the view to enable him, by representing Bates as a man of sub-
stance and worth, and producing a policy on Bates's life, to get ftirther advances for the
collateral security on that policy. I put it no higher, and do not suppose Mr. Cook would
have been a party to any other transaction ; but it seems on the 5th of September, Mr.
Bates, the prisoner, and Mr. Cook were together at Kugeley ; Mr. Bates was a person
who had before been better off in the world, but who had fallen into decay, and who had
been compelled to accept employment from Palmer in the shape of a sort or superintendent
of his stables. He was a hanger-on of Palmer's, working in his stables, though in rather
a better position ; but the man had run through everything, and had nothing left ; he was
a healthy young man, and Palmer proposed to him to insure his life, and produced that
common form of a proposal which we are all familiar with. Mr. Bates said, *• No, I do
not want to insure my life," and declined the notion of such a thing. Palmer pressed
him, and Mr. Cook interposed and said, " You had better do it ; it will be for your
benefit ; you are quite safe with Palmer ;" and they pressed him to sign the proposal for
this insurance for no less a sum than 25,000/., Cook attesting this proposal, which Palmer
filled in, referring to Palmer as the medical attendant, and referring to his assistant
Thirlby as the referee and friend who was to speak to this man's habits ; and these
proposals were sent up, I think, to the Solicitors* and General Office. That office not being
disposed to effect this insurance, they then sent up another fbr TO,OGO/. to the Midland

FIRST PiCY^ Mir 14^ 1856L

poiilwii of this mtM ; tmd theo, instead of it taraing out tkat he ^mm a gentlenun of
respMMifeilitj aad. mcaBB, it turiMd out tfaat he waa a mere person ia the eatablialmiept of
Palmer. The office was not satiafied, and the thing dropped.

LiOTd dmrstsLU — Whatever yoa haTe jet ata*id beam mi HktrqaetfAcn the jury are to
try, and I fioppose this inll have the- sane tendency.

7%e Attome^'Qenerfd, — If yonr^Lordship irill trust to me, I will take care not to state
anytbhig Aat is not important.

Lord Campbell.— By oar law we cannot allow one crime to show the possibility of
another, bat whatever may bear on the charge to be tried is strictly admissible.

The Attomey^Geaeral, — I trust your Lordship will give me credit fi>r the greatest
anxiety not to bring forward anything unimportant^ but thia aeem& to me matter which
may hLve a most important bearing by and by.

Gentlemen, that failed; and no money could be obtained on the seearity of that
policy ; it may be important in more ways than one, but it is important in this respect
that it shova the desperate straits in a pecuniary point of view into which the prisoner
had at that time oomie.

Now that fiiiliu^ we go back for a moment to the insurance on the brother's U&i
and I £nd by the corrcspeudence which took pkice between Palmer and Mr. Pratt,
wiiich will be produced to you, that Mr. Pratt at this time, having applied to the office
at which the ioaurance on the brother's life — Walter Palmer — had been effected^ found a
difficulty in getting the moacy» and thereupon began to press Palmer for immediate
payment of his bills. Having the correspondence before me, I will refer you to the
letter of the 10th of September, to which I called yoar attention just now ; and before
reading these letters I will state that which I will by and by prove, — that he had the
postmaster at Rugeley completely under his influence, and that the letters addressed to
bis mother were intercepted in tiic Pest<-office and handed over to him.

[Th« learned Attorney-General then read extracts from various letters dated in Sep*-
tember and October, passing between Palmer and Mr. Pratt, showing the manner in
which Mr. Pratt was pressing Palmer for the payment of various overdue bills and tho
interest arising upon them.]

Gentlemen, on the 6th of November two writs were issued for 4000i., onea^inst
Palmer himself tbe other against his mother. But Mr. Pratt writes to him oi^ the
6th November to say he has sent the writs to Mr. Crabb, but tbat they should not be
served until he sent ^rther dii^eotion^ and he strongly urges him to make good arnang«^
ments, and also to come up and make an arrangement as to a bill for 1500i. which was
coming due on the 9th of the mouth. On tlie 10th of November, the day on which he
ssdd in a former letter he would delay the service of the writs to» Palmer went up and
paid a sum of 300/. ; hs had paid before two sums-of 2502., one personally, and one acknow*
ledged by Mr. Pratt, and which three sums made up a sum of S00/» Mr. Pratt deducted
from this SOO/. for two mouths' discoun^. and that left 60ai. to the credit oif the firsjt bill
coming due, which was a bill of the 25 th of October; that left therefore HOQi. of the
2000/. biU still payable. On the 13th of November, which is a veiy important day, fof
it is the day on which Pokstar won at Shrewsbury, he writes a letter referring to tha
Prince of Wales policy^ and said steps would be taken to enforce it. That, gentlemeui
was the state. of things iu which be was placed at the period of the last letter, dated tho
13th of Novemhery and y^u will find from this oerrespondence that- Mr. Pratt, who was
the a^ent through whom this bill ,had been discounted, hdd at that time l2,5QjdL of bills
in his hand, miniu^ th& 600L to which I have adverted, and whicb had been paid off oo
this, leaving also about 10,000/. of bills, thcwhole of which b<tre the forged acceptances of
Palmer's mother, acceptances either forged by him or by some one at his desire, and foB
which therefore he was oriminaily responsible ;- and you fimi that^ the Prince of Wales
Office declining to pay tlie sum &>v which the brother's life had been insured, the 13,000£^
Mr. Pratt,, who held that policy as a collateral security, could no longer go.on*. woukd not
have been justined in further renewing these biUs ; and therefore had issued writs
against the mother, which were forthwith to be served in. case Palmer did not find the
means of at aU events paying off a portion, and enabling Mr. Pratt to jastify himself
to his clients in witbholdiug further legal proceedings.

Now this being the state of things, we come to the events connected with the races at
Shrewsbury. Mr. Cook wa& the owner^ as you are now aware, of a mare called Pole*
star, and she was entered for the Shrewsbury handicap. She was very advautageously
weighted^ and Cook, believed tiiat the maze would win, and he betted ^foc him) largely
upon tbat event. The race was run on. the 13th of November, the very day on which
the last letter was written, which would reach Palmer on the next day, the 14th; and

8 TRUL OF WILLUM PALMER.

tbe resnlt of the race vas this,— Polestar. irinning. Cook was entitled in the first place
to the stakes. Those stakes amounted to 424/., but of course subject to certain deduc-
tions, leaving a net sum of 381/. 19«. to. the credit of Cook. He hsid also betted largely
upon the race, partly for himself, and I ain told partly on commission. The result was
his betting-book showed a winning which amounted together with the stakes to 2050/.
He had been during the previous week at the Worcester races, and I shall show at Shrews-
bury he had in his pocket, besides the stakes which he was entitled to receive in London,
and that sum he would be entitled to be paid at Tattersall's at the settling — he had in
his pocket a sum of between 700/. and 800/. at Shrewsbni^. The stakes he would
receive through Messrs. Wetherby, the great racing agents in London, with whom he
kept an account, as many betting men do. The stakes would be sent up in the ordinary
course of things to Messrs. Wetherby, and Mr. Cook would be entitled to draw on:
Messrs. Wetherby for the amoant. He received many of his bets on the course, and had
a sum of 700/. or 800/. in his pocket. This race being run on the Monday, he would be
entitled on the ensuing Monday to receive his bets at Tattersall's, which amounted, as
we shall afterwards find, to 1020/.

Now within a week of that time Mr. Cook died, and the important inquiry of to-day
is how he came bv his death ; whether by natural means, or whether by the hand of man ;
and if the latter, by whose hand ?

Grentlemen, I must tell you first the state of health in which he was at the time he
went down to Shrewsbury ; it will be very important in the course of this inquiry. He
was a young man about twenty-eight when he died, slightly disposed to pulmonanr
complaints ; delicate in that respect, but otherwise a hale and hearty young man. He
had been in the habit from time to time, I believe more especially with reference to his
chesty of consulting a physician in London of the name of Dr. Savage, whom I shall call
before you, who saw him within a fortnight of his death, and who will tell you the con-
dition in which he was. On various occasions from time to time he consulted Dr.
Savage, and he then came to him in the May of 185.5. It seems he was at that time a
little anxious about the state of his throat. He was suffering with a complaint in his
throat, and there were one or two slight eruptions or sores about the mouth, and one or twa
spots, and he came to consult Dr. Savage. It seemed he had been taking mercury for
those sores, mistaking the character of the complaint ; Dr. Savage at once saw that was a
mistake, desired him to discontinue the mercury, put him under a course of tonics, saw
him several times, found an improvement rapidly take place, and this inconvenience dis'
appeared ; but inasmuch as this mode of treatment involved important consequences in
"which Dr. Savage might be mistaken, he did cause him to come to him from time to time
that he might see how he was going on, and whether he took a right view and adopted
a proper course of treatment ; and as lately as within a fortnight of Mr. Cook's death,
before he left London, he went to see Dr. Savage, and Dr. Savage examined his throat,
and examined him carefully, and will be prepared to tell you at that time there- was
nothing on earth the matter with him, except ih&i he had a slight thickening of some of
the organs of the throat, but nothing which could affect in the slightest degree the
general character of his health. As to the notion of his having an ulcerated sore throat,
the thing was out of the question. Dr. Savage subjected him to a minute and careful
examination, and will tell you most positively there was nothing the matter with the
man. Dr. Savage, however, who loved the young man, havihg seen him frequently, and
taken an interest in him, was most anxious to get him off the turf, and out of the hands
of evil companidns, 'and he told him there was nothing the matter with him, that his
chest was delicate, and advised him to go abroad for a couple of years, not believing it
was necessary he should do so, but thinking it was a good ground on which to put it, to
get him to break off these habits, and which there is strong reason to believe Cook
meditated.

Gentlemen, having seen Dr. Savage, he went to the Shrewsbury races, and, as I have
told you, his horse won. After the race he was naturally excited, as a man would be
who nad got to a low ebb with regard to his pecuniary afiairs — he was rejoiced his niare
had won, especially as it brought him a considerable amount of money, and he was more
or less excited, as a man might naturally be under those circumstances. He asked
various friends to dine with him to celebrate the event. They met at the Raven hotel,
and had two or three bottles of champagne. I am told it will be said he became the
worse for liquor on that occasion. There is not the slijghtest foundation for the sug-
gestion. He was an abstemious man at all times. On this occasion he may have taken a
glass or two of champagne to celebrate the event at which he rejoiced — ^tbat was all. He
went to bed with nothing the matter with him, got up the next day and went on the
course as usual. That night, the night of the 14th of November, a remarkable incident
happened, to which I beg to call your attention. A friend of his, a Mr. Fisher, occupied

FIRST DAY, May 14, 1856. 9

a room at the fiaven with a Mr. Herring, both of them being sporting men. Mr. Fisher,
in addition to being a sporting man, does agency in the way of receiving the winning of
persons who have won on the tarf. He was agent for Cook, and from time to time received
Cook's bets on the settliii^ day at TattersaU's. Fisher, with a person of the name of
Herring, was at the Shrewsbury races, and they occupied the next room to that occupied
by Palmer and Cook, for Palmer and Cook had gone together from lingeley to the racea
at Shrewsbury. Late in the evening Fisher, who had been invited by Cook to come and
have a glass of brandy-and-water in his room, went into the room in which Palmer and
Cook were, and found them' sitting at conversation at a table. Cook having a tumbler half>
full of brandy-and-water before him, Fisher went in and sat down, and Cook invited
him to have something to drink, at the same time saying to Palmer, " You will have some
more?" *' No ;" says Palmer, ** not unless you finish your glass." On which Cook said,
" That is soon done." He took up his glass Imlf-full of brandy-and-water, and tossed it
off at one gulp, leaving a teaspoonfnl at the bottom of the tumbler. He had scarcely
swallowed it when he said, " Good God I there is something in it that bums my throat. '
Palmer took up the glass and drank what remained and said, ** There is nothing in it."
Pushing the glass to Fisher and to Read, who came in at the moment, he said, *^ Cook
&ncies there is something in the brandy-and-water; taste it." On which they said, '*It
is very easy to say taste it, but you have left none." Within a few minutes Cook
suddenly left the room. He returned after a few minutes and called Fisher out, and told
him he was taken violently ill. Fisher went out with him. He was then taken with
violent vomitings. After a little while he was so bad that it was necessary to take him
to bed. He was taken to bed, and vomited then again and again in the most violent way.
It became necessary to send for a medical man. These vomitings continued for a couple
of hoars, the man retching with the greatest violence; the medical gentleman proposed au
emetic, which the prisoner would not hear of. They got him warm water, put a tooth-
brush to his throat to make him eject what he had taken. However, there was no
occasion for that, for the vomiting went on. After that, some stimulants were given to
him, some comforting matter, and after that a pill and a purgative dose. After about
two or three hours he became more tranquil, and about two or three o'clock he fell asleep
and slept till the next morning. Such was the state of the man's feeling at that time ;
1 cannot tell you what passed, because that is not evidence, but I can state this fact : he'
gave to Fisher the money he had about him, desiring him to take care of it, and Fisher
will tell you the money amounted to between 700/. and 800/. in a large roll of notes, so
that we have by that means the opportunity of getting at the sum whi<^ at that time he
had about him personally.

The next morning, after having passed a more tranquil night, he was better. After a
short time he got up and went out on the course, feeling himself better. He saw Fisher, and
Fisher gave him back his notes, which he had, therefore, as we prove, on the Thursday
morning. The next day, on the Thursday morning, he was out, looking and feeling very
ill, bat the vomiting having ceased. On that day a horse of the prisoner's ran at
Shrewsbury called Chicken. He had backed that horse heavily, and the horse lost.
I will show when Palmer went to Shrewsbury he had no money, and he was reduced to
the necessitytof borrowing 25/. in order to get to Shrewsbury. His horse -lost, and he
lost bets on the race. After this he and Cook left Shrewsbury and returned to Rugeley,
Cook going to the Talbot Arms, an hotel at Rugeley, which is exactly opposite to the
prisoner's house, which is on the opposite side of the street, and there Cook took up his
abode.

Now, gentlemen, there is one incident connected with this Shrewsbury part of the
story, to which before I quit Shrewsbury it is necessary I should call your particular
attention. I have stated to you that this happened on the night of the Wednesday, how
Cook having taken this glass of brandy-and-water was suddenly taken ill and remained
ill for several days. On the same night, shortly before this time, a woman of the name
of Mrs. Brooks had occasion to see Palmer at the Raven Hotel* ^ She knew he was
staying there. She is 1 am told a remarkable person ; remarkable in this respect, that
though a female she is connected with the turf— she bets on commission. She has at her
disposal an establishment of jockeys for whom she acts as a sort of register, and for whom
she makes engagements. The prisoner's horse was to run the next day ; and she came
on that night to speak to him about a jockey whom he wanted to employ to ride his
horse. She came up stairs somewhere a];>out eleven o'clock, and turned into a lobby
into which Palmer's room opened. As she turned into the lobby she saw Palmer, whom
she knew perfectly well, holding up a tumbler to the light of the gas which was burning
in the passage, looking at it with the caution of a man who was watching to see what
was the condition of the liquid. Having looked at it through the gaslight he withdrew to
his own room, and presently returned with the glass in his hand, and then went into the

le TRIAL OF WILIIAM PALMER.

Tcam wliere Cook wu, and in which room Cook drank the hrandy-and-'water from which
I dare say jovl will be disposed to infer that his sickness wa« oeeasioned.

Now, gentlemen, I do not allege it was by means of anytbtiig wMch cBosed his sick-
ness that his death was occasioned, but I will show jon thren^rnvt the enraing days at
Biig«ley that he constantly recei-ved things from the prisHier^heiidsy and that during
tlnme days Cook's sickness was perpetnaUy going on. I will s&ow yen that after he died
antimony was found in the tissnes of his body, and ttiMimoBy was fiMnd in his blood.
Antimony xdmiaistered in its nsnal state as a tsrtarie emetic is oi» ef the greatest irritants
that eaa l)e introdnced into ilbe stomach, and if taken SMWt eamse- great sickness: but H
was not that of which' this man died. The- charge is that he was killed— having beem
pvepared for the reception of the poison by antimony- — that he was killed by strychnine 7
aAd before I introduce tojtm, the scenes which took place at Rugeley,. which I shall haiw
te. detail to you, let me give you some inlbrmation with regard to the character of the
poison.

Yon have heard, I dare say, of the Tegetsbleprodnct known by the term of nuop tomica,
Tn that nut or bean there resides a fatal poison capable of being extracted fwm it by the
skill and operations of bimi ; of this the most minute quantity is fetal to animal life : fivm
half a grain to three-quarters of a grain will destroy life. You may imagine, therefore,
how minute' is tfhe dose that will prove fatal. It acts immediately on the nerves and
muscles and motion of the human body. In the human organisation l^e nervous system
may be divided into two main parts— the nerves of sensation, by which the consciousiiess
of all external sensation is coov««yed to the brain ; and the nerves of motion, which- are, as
it were, the intermediate agents between the intellectual power of man and the physical
action which arises fpom his crganisKition. Those are the two branches, having their
seat, or rather their origin, in the immediate vieinitj of man's intellectual existence.
They are entirely distinct throughout the whole of their ramifications ; and the one set of
nerves may be afiected while the others are left undisturbed. You may paralyze the
nerves of sensation and you may leave the nerves which act on the voluntary muscles,
the muscles of movem^it wilt be unaffected ; or you may reverse the situation of thiji^
and affect the nerves of vcrfition, leaving the nerves of sensation totaWy undisturb^.
Strychnia, it appears, affects the nerves which act." on the volnntaiy muscles and- leaves
wholly untouched the nerves on which human consciousness depends, and it is important
to bear in mind this distinction. Some poisons, as you know, overpower the coifficionsness
of man and produce a total absence of all sensation, and so terminate in death; but the
poison to which I am referring affects the voluntary actimi of the muscles of the body,
leaving altogether unimpaired the . consciousness at that time. ■ Now the way in which,
acting on the voluntary muscles, strychnia is fatal to life is this : it produces the most
intense excitement of all these muscles, violent convulsions take place, spasms which
affect the whole muscles of the body ; these, after a series of convulsive throes, end in
rigidity — all the muscles become, after fearful cramps, fixed, and especially the respira-
tory muscles^ within which the lungs have their play, are fixed with rigidity. By that
means respiration is prevented and death necessarily ensues. The symptoms are known
to ntedical men under the termof fc^owws, that is to say, convulsive motion of the muscles.
Under that fbrm of tetanus you have the utmost rigidity produced — convufeions followed
by rigidity, the legs distended, the feet curved out of their natural position, the muscles of
the chest fixed, the muscles of the back, which hold the head m its^ erect position, forced
back by the intensity of their excited retention, the head is thrown back, and the body
assumes the form of a bow, resting on the back of the head and the heels. That is the
form in which death arises from strychnia. It is at the same time right to say that tekinuSf
producing death, arises from other causes as well as strychnia ; but there are character-
istic differences which, I believe, prevent the possibility of a mistake to those who are
connected with this department of science. There is what is called tromatic tetanm^ from,
the Greek word Tromosj signifying a wound. You have often heard of lock-jaw arising
from a cut, or the ulceration of some part of the body. There is also what is called
idiopathic tetanust which, as arising from disease, generally from sudden chill, produces
this state of rigour of the muscular system ; but there is the most marked difference between
them.

Gentlemen, I have reason to believe that an ?ittempt will be made, wheu I have shown
you the symptoms which attended this man's death, to confound these different classes of
disease. Therefore it is in the outset, before I introduce the symptoms that attended thifr
man's death, necessary to distinguish between these classes of cases ; and the marked
distinction is this: — ^Tn the first place, with regard to idiopathic tetanus, it is hardly ever
known in this country to prove ftital. The instances are extremely rare. In hotter
climates it is a foi-n^ of death not unfrequent. In this country it not unfrequently
happens, but death resulting from it is a most unusual occurrence. Tromatic tetanus is ar

FIRST DAT, Mat 14, 1956* tV

thing of more frequent occurrence. There are rery few medlctl pracfitioners -who hare
not heard of such eases, and few hospitals in which snch oases do net occar. With
regard to tronattc tetanas, in this ease that is ant of the qaeatien, hecaase I shall shew-
yon a fortnight before hia death this yomig man had netbine the matter with him. I
shall show yon, at the tine of hia death ai^ after his death, there waa nothing throngh*
ont his wbele system i» the shape of a woond, the only thing whieb could have produced
from external eaases tronatie tetamis. Pf it be sn^^gested this nay ha^e been a fbrm of
idiopathic tetanns, 1^ answer wiii be th»^there is this distinetron between the known
ibrm of tetanus and the tetanms which arises from stiyehiftia. In the caseff of idiopathic
and tromatic Manu&'^iu the nataral tetanns, the tetanna Aram wenads — the disease-
comes on wiA milder symptoms at first, grednaily progressing towards the derelopment
and the final eoraptetioa of the disease, bnt alwaya wHhoot intermission. When once it
has begnn-- though as hi erery oAer disease, as we know, the. paroxysms wiR be from.
time to time more or less intense, and as still from the comaMncement to Ae dose the-
parexysBS continue their conrse 'as human diseases usually do, from the milder form,
inm the commencement to the moiie aggniTated form and condition on to the end —
that is not so in tetemus fi'om strychnia ; that conies on in paroxysms which may sabside-
fbr a time and be renewed. But there ia tibis fkr^er and more striKine and remarkable
dilference. In the case of tetanus of idiopathic or tromatic cases, the disease necessarily'
(KCapies a considerable number of hours, sometimes Vwo or diree days, at all events
twenty-ftmr or twelre hears. I believe there is hardly even as instance fcnown in which
it was so small a time as eight or nine hours; but here we-are dealing with a case not of
hours, but of minutes, in which there is no oontinumg of the disease, and to the gradual
development of its climax, till its end. But in this the parexysms came on, as they do
by strychnia, with all their power and force from the commencement, and, after a fow
^kort minutes and a few foarfol strugales, the agony terminates in the dissolution of the
victin^. That is the distinction, and, having drawn your attention to iMs distinction, I
will now proceed to tell you what took pla<Je at Hogeley. There is, however, this
observation, of which my friend reminds me. Mr. Palmer was a medical man, under-
standing the use of strychnia and its effects. It had not escaped his attention. I have*
a book before me which was found at his house after his arrest. It is a book called
'The Manual for Students preparing for Examinatioii at Apothecaries' Hall,' and I
find written on the firat page of it, in his own fanndwritiog, ** Strychnia kills by causing'
tetanic fixing of the respiratory muscles." I do not want to attach more importance tO'
that than it deserves^ All knowledge relating to poisons is legitinmtely belonging to^
the department of science which he prcMfesses, and there is nothiiig in the fact that in=
any book bt>longing to him a note should be found relating to this poison^ I use that
only to this extent — ^that the use of strychnia and its effect on human lifi^ had come to
his particular and personal attention.

Gentlemen, I will add this while I am on the subject of strychniav T shall produce'
before you a body of medical evidence to show you the distinction between the form of
tetanus which may be called the natural form of tetanus, and tetanus resulting from the-
administration of strychnia. Happily, the cases in which death arises^ frsm strychnia
are very rare. The experience of the medical profession has been limited on the
Subject ; but it so happens there have been several cases in which the death of which the
proximate cause was tetanas was, beymid all poscfibility of -doubt, traced to the adminis-
tration, accidentally or otherwise, of strychnia. I will have 1^ medical men before yon,
before this case is over, who attended the dHlbrent cases of death hrtmi strychnia. I
have a body of medical testimony to show you what is the form of death and the
symptoms of appearance of tetanus arising from natural causes or from external injury ;
and you will find that the symptoms and the appearances which I am about to detail to
you are exactly those of the deaths which have taken place from sttyehnia^ and have the
characteristic difference ta which I have just now adverted, as distingnishing them from
death arising from tetanus produced by the other means. With these observations, which
I hope have not wearied you, I will now come to what took place after the airlval of
these parties at Rageley.

Gentlemen, they arrived there on the night of Thursday the* 1 5th of November
between the hours of 10 and 11. Cook, on being ashed how he was, said he had been^
poorly at Shrewsbury ; but it did not appear to the people at the inn that there was any-
thing to indicate the presence of serious complainr, and he took some refi^shment and
went to bed. He got up the next morning susd wen* out and dined that day with Palmer,
came back to the inn, I think, about 1© o'clock that evening, perfectly sober, and went
to bed. I call attention to this^ because you will hear the account the prisoner gave of
him the next day or the day after. He appeared to be wdl, and went to bed without
anything to lead any one to suppoas there was anything unasnal the matfee with hijir

12 TRIAL OF WILLUM PALMER.

The next morning at an early hour Palmer was with him, and from that time, daring the
"whole of Saturday and Sunday, he -was constantly in attendance on him. He ordered
him some coffee. Coffee was brought up by the chambermaid, Elizabeth Mills. It was
taken into the room, given to the prisoner, and she left ; Palmer, haTing received the
coffee, gave it to the man, who was in bed, and had, therefore, an opportunity of dealing
with it. Immediately after that the same symptoms set in which had taken place at
Shrewsbury, and throughout the whole of that day and the next day the prisoner con-
stantly administered everything to Cook. Cook is tormented with this incessant and
troublesome vomiting. Toast-and-water was brought over that morning from Palmer's
house, not made in the inn, where it might have been made, but it is brought over.
About 11 or 12 o'clock a basin of broth was brought over. There might be nothing in
that ; but now mark the circamstances. It seems that Palmer desired a woman of the
name of Rowley, who will be called before you, to go to an Inn in Bugeley, the Albion,
to get some broth. The woman got the broth, took it to Palmer's house, and put it in a
saucepan on the kitchen fire to warm. She had something to do in the back kitchen, and
went into the back kitchen — she saw no more of the broth, or Palmer, until Palmer»
having poured it into a basin, brought it to her, told her to take it over to the Talbot
Arms, and to tell any one to whom she might give it to take it up to Cook, and say
Smith had sent it.

It seems there was a Mr. Jeremiah Smith, an intimate friend of Palmer's, whose name
he used on this occasion ; the broth was taken up to Mr. Cook, who tried to swallow a
spoonful of it; it immediately made him sick, and he brought it off his stomach ; the
broth was taken down stairs again. After a little while the prisoner came across, and
asked if Mr. Cook had had his broth ; they said no ; that he had tried to take it, but that it
made him sick, and he could not keep it on his stomach. Palmer said he must take it ; he
went up stairs and desired the broth to be brought up again, and insisted on Cook taking
some of it, which he did ; the consequence was he immediately began to vomit again,
and threw it off his stomach. Now of that broth, Elizabeth Mills, the chambermaid^
when it had been taken down stairs in consequence of Mr. Cook's not being able to keep
it on his stomach in the first instance, saying " it was very nice looking broth," took a
couple of tablespoonfuls. Within half an hour of that time the woman was taken vio-
lently ill ; vomiting came on, which lasted five or six hours ; she was obliged to go to bed
at 12 o'clock in the day ; she could not get up till 5 or 6 in the afternoon; and in the
course of that time sh6 will tell you she vomited not less than twenty times ; these being
exactly the same symptoms which manifested themselves in Cook's person after he drank
a glass of brandy-aod-water at Shrewsbury. On this Saturday Mr. Bamford, who is a
medical practitioner at Kugeley, was called in, and he went to see Mr. Cook at half-past
3 ; Palmer told him the man had a bilious attack, that he had dined with him the day
before, and had drank too freely of champagne, which had disordered his stomach. On
one or two occasions I shall show Palmer to have represented to Cook his suffering under
bilious diarrhoea ; he so spoke of his complaint at Shrewsbury, and to every one to whom
he speaks or writes relating to Mr. Cook he represents the symptoms which appeared at
Shrewsbury as being those of bilious diarrhoBa. Now, I shall show you by a medical
practitioner at Shrewsbury, and by Mr. Bamford, and by another medical man at Rugeley,
that, while there was this vehement vomiting on both occasions, there was not a single
bilious symptom at any time. Mr. Bamford comes in at half-i)ast 3 ; he finds Mr. Cook
suffering fi-om violent vomiting ; and he states the stomach was in so irritable a state that
it would not retain a tablespoonful of anything; he naturally tried to see what the
symptoms could be which might lead him to ibrm a notion as to the cause of these
painful symptoms. He found to his surprise that the man's pulse was perfectly natural,
only at 70, his tongue was quite clean, his skin was quite moist, there was not the slightest
trace of fever, or any one of those symptoms which would be expected in a bilious
attack. Having heard from Palmer that he ascribed it to an excess on the part of Mr.
Cook in taking wine the day before, he said to Mr. Cook, *' I understand you have taken
wine, and that that is the cause of it." ** Well," said Cook, ** I suppose I must have
done so ; but it is very odd, 1 only took two glasses." This was said in Palmer's pre-
sence ; so that it turned out the representation that Mr. Cook had taken an excess of
champagne the day before was incorrect, for he had only taken a couple of glasses, which
could hardly be supposed to occasion these consequences. Mr. Bamford prescribed some
effervescing saline medicine. He saw Mr. Cook again that evening, when he found the
sickness still continued ; and I should state, after he went away the prisoner ordered more
coffee for Mr. Cook. Coffee was brought up at 4 o'clock, and he vomited immediately ;
at 6 o'clock they took him up some barley-water ; Palmer was not there, and it did not
produce the usual vomiting; at 8 o'clock they took him up arrowroot; Palmer was there,
the vomiting took place, and the arrowroot was brought up.

FIRST DAY, May 14, 1858. 13

Gentlemen, these may be mere coincidences, nevertheless it is a fact worthy of atten-
tion that thronghont the whole of that Saturday Palmer was constantly in and ont,
ministering to him a rariety of things, and whenever he did administer anything to him
«ickness invariably ensued. That evening Mr. Bamford came again, and found the sick-
ness still continuing; he prepared two opiate pills for him to quiet the action of the
stomach. I will state the contents of those pills, that it may be understood what medicine
he took ; they consisted of half a grain of morphia, half a grain of calomel, and four
grains of rhubarb. I pray your attention to the contents of those pills, because by-and-by
you will see as I go on to the ensuing nights the great importance of attending to the
ingredients of those pills. That takes us through Saturday, and leaves the man still
suffering at the close of that day from the vomiting which had commenced in the
morning.

Gentlemen, I now go to the Sunday. In the morning between 7 and 8 o'clock of that
day, Mr. Bamford is fetched by Palmer to Mr. Cook, and finds the sickness x^ontinuing ;
but he finds to his surprise that no symptoms of bile made their appearance at all, and he
was at a total loss to conjecture what could occasion this sickness. He changes the form
of his medicine. He visits him again in the evening ; he will tell you he saw what
Mr, Cook brought up. He was constantly vomiting, but it was as clear as water, with-
out the slightest appearance of bilious secretion. On the Sunday evening he sees him
again, the sickness still going on, no fever, the skin moist and the tongue, clean. He
tried what the effect of pressure would be on the stomach or abdomen, and there was no
pain. The excretions from the body were natural, and there were no symptoms of bile
of any sort. That closes tiie Sunday, and we now come to a very important day, namely
Monday the 19th.

Gentlemen, on the morning of Monday the 19th Palmer left Rugeley to go to London,
and I will show you presently what he went to London for. On tluit morning before he
left he came over early to the hotel, and he ordered a cup of coffee to be made for
Mr. Cook ; he took up the coffee hiifiself and gave it to Mr. Cook, and Mr. Cook, as
usual, vomited immediately after swallowing the coffee. After that Palmer left. Mr.
Bamford came to the hotel, and found Mr. Cook still suffering from the vomiting ; he
^ve him a new medicine, which consisted of half a drachm or henbane, three drachms
of tincture of magnesia, and two of simple syrup, a quarter to be taken every three or
four hours. Whether from the effect of that medicine, or whether it was that no longer
anything was given to him which could cause the irritation under which he was before
«ufferiug, but from that time the greatest improvement manifested itself in Mr. Cook.
Palmer was not present the whole of that day; he had gone to London. Mr. Cook
throughout that day is better. Mr. Bamford goes about 12 or 1 o'clock, and finds a most
marked improvement. Gentlemen, it might have been the result of the medicine ; but
the man is well comparatively, and Mr. Bamford recommends him to get up ; he gets up,
washes and dresses ; he recovers his freshness and spirits, and sits up for several hours.
Two persons of the name of Ashmole, jockeys, who knew him, came to inquire after
him ; they were admitted, went up and talked to him. His trainer, a person of the name
of Saunders, came at 5 or 6 o'clock, was admitted, and found him in a comparatively
good state. So he continued until night. He took in the mefm time coffee and broth, and
was enabled to keep them on his stomach ; and so things continued until a late hour that
evening. Palmer, as I told you, went to town on the Monday morning ; and as I have
considered it most convenient in this case to follow the order of events in strict chrono-
logical series, 1 will now interrupt the further inquiry of what passed afterwards at
Kugeley, in order to follow Palmer through the events in which he was concerned on
the Monday in London. He had written to a person of the name of Herring to meet him
that day at a house in Beaufort Buildings. It seems tbat in Beaufort Buildings there is a
boarding-house kfept by a person of the name of Hawkes, which Palmer was in the habit
of frequenting when he came to town ; and he went there, making an appointment with
Herring to meet him. As I have told you, Herring was a man upon the turf ; he was
one of those who had been to Shrewsbury, and who knew Mr. Cook, and who can speak
to that part of the case as to Mr. Cook's illness at Shrewsbury. But the important part
of Herring's evidence is what I am now about to narrate. On seeing Palmer he first
inquired after Mr. Cook. Palmer said, " He is sdl right ; his doctor has given him a
^ose of calomel, and as the weather is wet and cold he is not to come out to-day : what I.
want to see you about is settling his account."

The Monday, you will recollect I told you, was the settling-day at Tattersall's, and on
that day it was necessary that Mr. Cook's bets which he had won should be realized.
Now his usual agent for that purpose was Fisher, and the probability is, I cannot but
think, that, if he sent up his account to be realized at Tattersall's that day by Palmer, he
would desire Palmer if he did not go to Tattersall's himself to give it to the usual agent.

Ift TRIAL OF WILLIAM PALMER.

■dmt the bete night he got in bj bam. , Palmftr wm » MnaYMrtit Tattcaesairji, iiud could
.not prefient himttlf tfaene, -but there irm Pisber, who was the usual agent &r that fnirpose.
Herring, aatiuraUj flnongh, wai snrpmed ob heacuig that he was to get in Mr. Cook's
.deUs ; t>nt, however, hit uadcrtoDk to do s«. Palmer praduced a pieoe 'O/ paper which he
aaddeontauied die hat of thesuaa which Mr. Ceok was lentitled to reeeiKre, and he men-
tioDod the namea of the differeat persona of whoai Mr. Cook had -won mooey, with the
mims whidh thef were nspeetively Uahle to Mr. Cook for. Herring held out his hand to
jtake the paper, npoA whidi Palmer said/^ I will not give yon thi^, f will keep it myself;
here is a tnt of paper," teanbg off a piece from a letter ; ** irrite down what I will read,
to you, I wBl keep this paper and it will be a check against you." He then dictated to
Jbma the Bamea of different persona, with the mmA £or which they were fiabk, and then
said, " How much do you make that come to?" upon which Herring said ** 1020/.;"
'^ Very. wcdl/' says Palmer, ** then |iay. yourself 67." I anppose there was some bet or
:80inethittg due to him or the commiasion. ^ Pay SheHey SO/. ; if you see Bell, tell him
Mr. Ciook wiU fay him wihen heoomes up on Thursday or Friday ; " and then he says,
** Dedactisig 30/., how mach ^e you make that 7 "—** 988/.," says Herring. ** Yes," says
Pakuar, ** that is ^ihit he makes it; I will pve yon 16/., and thatwfll make 1000/. ; pay
yourself iat my hill aOO/." That is a faiU which he owed to Herring, which was over-
due, «ad which it was necessary should .he paid.—*' Pay Mr. Padwiok 850/., and pay Mr.
Pratt 450/." I told yon before I showed you from the correspoiuienoe how it was, and
it had become aibsolnliely necessary to avoid the issuing of the writs, or, at all evicnts,
their service vpon his mottier, and all the consequences which would ensue from the dis-
fikmxre which most aecessariiy then take place. He now, out of the proceeds of Mr.
Cook's bets, pays two bets at all events of his own : one of 200/. to Herring, and the
other of 458/. to Pratt. IFidi i«gard to Padwiek's d(fbt, the 850/. I am told was a bet
Tvhieh Pftdwiek had won partly from Palmer and partly from Mr. Cook, hut &r which
Pad wick will (say he looked to Palmer. There is a letter -of Palmer promising to pay the
.«mouBt ; -and you will fecoQect Padwick had lum in a position in whidi, at any moment,
.if he failed to keep on good terms with him, he wae in bis power. Half of that 2000/., bill
which had been discounted by Padwick as far back as"^ 185^ upon a forged acceptance,
was still o»padd4 he had therefoie an interest in pacifying ]?adwick and keying him
i^niet ; he was interested also in doing the same thing with regard to Pratt, and therefore
he |iaid them those sums.

That is the state of things with regard to the d^ispoeition of the mostey realised ftar Mr.
Cook at Tattersall'fi on the Monday. The way in which he deured it should be done wae
.tills : he desired Herring to send cheques to Pratt and Padwick, and he was so anxious
.about it that he begged >him- to send the cheques in tli^ morning hefoce he got to
Tattorsall's and had got. in the amoomts. Herring said, ** No, I shall not do that, becaase
1 may not get the money." Fklmer said, '* It is all right, depend upon it yon will get the
jnoney ;" amd, said he, ^ liiat money of Pratt's must he paid, because it is for a bill of sale
Miacoount of the mare," — ^at is J^lestar. That was not the fact, it was 450/. to he paid
•to Pratt to be written off Ihe bill on which ihepe was the £brged aeceptance, and on
which Pratt had already issaed the writs; and he had already engaged to pay it on the
Satunday : we having now got to the following Monday. Palmer had two ^rvelopes
rpnapared, which he gave to Herring in whiich to send the cheques ; however the man
refused to do that or to pay until he had got the money. When this conversation had
-taken place, he then came to a settlement with Herring himself &>r aome other small
thetting 'transaotions. It .seemed he owed Herring the balance of a betting transaction, 5/.,
w^ioh he^prepoeed tcpay him ; he ppodneed a SoL note, but Herring eonld not^ve him
the entine chainge, and gave him a 20/. cheque. I will«how yon, gentlemen, what became
.of that dieqne. After that he says to him, " When you birve dene all that, send down
word to one what youiiave done." Herring saad, " fihidl I send to yon?" " Yes," he said,
^' to me or to Mr. Cook, it will be the same tiling." GentLemen, I shall prove to you
before this case is over that the letters to Mr. Cook were intercepted, also through the
instrumentality of Mr. Cheshire, the postmaster. Upon this Herring went to Tattersairs
and got all tiie money,. except a aum 9i IQQl^ which Mr. Morris paid Mr. Bhort; he
owed 200/.^ and he paid 80/., .leaving ^ 10/. ^\l unpaid. In consequence of this he did
not pay Padwick the 350/., and nrrote to Mr. Cook by that night's post to say so ; but he
paid the 450/. to Pratt. On that mme day Pahner went to Pratt, paid him 20/. by the
cheque of Herring which he had received from Herring, and 30/. in notes, making 50/.,
and he then drew up a memorandnm' apptying^ those sums, together with 200/. which Mr.
Fisher had advanced in conaeqnenee of the letter from Mr. Cook, upon the credit of the
fiums which Mr. Fisher woidd veeeive at Tatteraall's, towards payment Of his mother's
acceptance due on tiie 26th •ctf <i^otober, making altogether the sum of 1300/. So that
you will «ee, gsnllemen, by fthe pajmieat -of this 450/. and the 50/., making 500/., and tiie

FIRST DAY, Hat 14, 185$. I5

aO(ML which he had {Mud on ^e Satorday pwoeding,iM stopped fbr a moment the preMate
which was being put upon him bj Mr. Pcatt. He pramisea to make forther pa^meiit 1)1
a very short tune, Mr. Pcatt urguig U 5tas absolatefy neGeesaij iht matter should not be
allorwed to sleep, as them was ao chanoe of gettiag anYthiog nom the iasonuice office at
that -dme ; and he makes a promise ^at he will in a tew days make farther remittances.
And he goes down on tbe Monday afternoon to Rageley, after having: eife<^ed this trans-
action ia the eoarse ti the day. He arrived at Riigeley on the Monday night about
Bine o'clock, and hejproeeeded to^see Mr. Cook at the Talbot Anas, and from that hour
until a late hoar in Che evening, ten or eleren o'clock, he was ia and out of Mr. Cook's
TOom« That night, after arriving at Rugdey, he went to a man of the name of Newton,
the assistant of a aorgeon there named Salt, and adced that maa to grve him some
atrychnia, and Neorton gave him three gndns of strychnia about nine o'clock, attaching
so gi«at importanee to the &Gt of ^ving to a medical man a ^ng whi(^ is sometimes
thoogh rarely used in medical practice. Mr. Bamfiard had sent the same pills which he
liad given on the Satoiday night aad the fianday night to the Tadbot Arms to be
taken by Mr. Cook, er rather he took them hhnself and left them with the housekeeper,
by whom they were delivered to the maid, who took them np stairs aad put them in the
nfioal place where the medicine was usually pat to be administered by Palmer, for
Palmer came in evening after evening and administered the medicine which Mr. Cook
was to take. Palmer was in and out there, and there is no doubt Mr. Cook took pills ; it
will be for you to say whether he took the pills prepared by Mr. Bamford, and which he
had taken on the Saturday and Sunday night, or whether, as this accusation suggests, the
prisoner substituted for the pills of Mr. &mford some of his own concoction, in which
strychnia was mixed. He left theasan about eleven o'clock, or later than that, well attd
comfortable after the day; he had been considerably better from tbe morning; he was
alone about twelve o'clock, when suddenly the women servants in the lower part of the
house were.alarmed by the most vicdeat screams proeeeding from Mr. Cook's room ; they
rushed up stairs, one of them went in, and they found him in a state of the greatest agony,
screaming in the most fearful manner, shrieking murder, and cidling upon Christ to save
his soul ; evidently in the most intense pain ; he was convulsed ; he coold not keep his
hands and arms quiet ; he beat the bed convulsively with them, and his whole frame was
in convulsions; all the time he was perfectly conscious, and begged PaAmer might be sent
fbr ; one of the women Tan acixxs to fetch Palmer, who in a few minutes came ; daring
the whoie of the time the man's scneams continued mnntermptedly, and the pain con-
tinueddhe same. The women will describe to you his symptoms ; he was beating the bed
-violently, rolling about eonvulsively in every direction, screaming, as I have already
-aaentionied ; his eyes were starting out of his head. After these violent conmlsions had
lasted a short time, his arms and legs became perfectly rigid, his 'mouth appeared closed,
jBoA he was gasping for breath, and could hardly speak for want of it. Palmer came and
.found him in this condition ; then he ran across for medunae ; the m^n's condition still
remained on his return the same. On his return Mr. Cook said, " Oh, dear I doctor, I shall
die." ** No my lad," he said, " you will not ;" and he •proceeded to ^e him an opiate
wckixtaie and a oonple of pills. I can hardly suppose this medicine had the effect of
removing the symptoms; the medicine was vomited and the pills were not ; they were
looked for in ^e utensil into which he 'vomited, bat ^ey were not found. Shortly after
he became more tnmquil, his arms were stiff, he called to the servants to rub them, they
did BO and found them 'Oold ; still by degrees these symptoms aubsided, and the man
became better.

Gentl«nen, the medical men who will be called befbre you will tell you they have
no doubt this was the tetamis of strychnia. The mode in which it showed itself coming
on with the full -violenoe of a paroxysm in the first instance, continuing ais it did, is
only to be ascribed dn their opinion to strychnia taken in too infinite a quantity to take
away life. I will make an observation presently on the inference which may be drawn
from this state of things ; I will not st(^ to do so at this moment, for we have more
ijBportant events to deal with.; enough that for the moment those symptoms abated ; he
hecame more tranquil ; he seemed exhausted by what he had gone through, and Nature
asserted her claim to rest and repose, and he began to dose and ^eep. Palmer stayed
with him for some time, then left him, went to his own house ; and so things remained
antil the next day, Tuesday the 20th, the day of his death. On that morning Mr.
Cook was £onnd comparativelv comfortable, although still retaining the most intense and
-vivid impression of what he had |jone tl»«ough the night before ; he conversed with the
chambermaid on the subject of his conditian; the prisoner saw Mr. Bamford, and told
iiim he did not wish to have Mr. Cook disturbed, that he was better comparatively, and
that he had had a fit the night before. That same morning, between half-past 1 1 and 12
o'dodl^ there 4)ccaarred an incident to whidi I beg your particular attention. On

16. ' ' TBIAL O^ WILLIAM 'PALMER.

da^ tlie flnsonar went to the sbop of a Mc. Hawkins, » Uni|^gi8t At^ugel^y ; he had'^t
dejp^.wiUi Eawkloft for two yeavfi. before &r:hig fonuer aaustaBt, Tbirlby, haTiDs set vp
in JttusineflB as vA cbeuUt aad. dniggist^ PfiUmer^had fitmi that time deaU with him for
th&4rnga and oheinicaleompouoda that he reii|uised. Oa this ^y hs went to Hawkins's
shq{>,.aiid saw..bi8 ascistauty a p^noB of ih^naine of Roberts ^ he produced a bill/and in
tho. first- fihue.said -hewanted'two'dTa^mn of pnit^e acM. ' Whilst the prnssic acid was
being put lip for hini) apersoii of the namb of Newton, the same man of whom, if you
helicTe Newton; he had th© sti^chnia the night before, came into the shop ; oh whieh
the prijwner took hi^ by the arm and said, ** I have got something I want to say to yon ;"
led him outside the door into the street, and began to talk to him about a very unimpor-
tant matter, namely, when his employer's son was about to g^ to the fiirm which he had
recently taken in another part of the country ; a matter iu which, as far as we are
aw^r^ Palmer 4)ould have no possible interest. Having got Newton into the street, he
stood in conversation with him .until a person of the name of Bassington happened. to
con^ up : the Utter two entered into conversation, and drew off a little on one^ide. As
£w>n as they were engaged in full conversation, Pahner came baek into HaVkins's shop
and desired the «8Gistaii1> to put him up nx grains of strychnia and a eertidn quantity of
Batley's liquor of optu]b,*for which he produced another bill. While these things were
being put up, he stood in the doorway. Newton continued his conversation with Basshig-
ton^ and did not come into the shop. When the things were read^ the prisoner took them
up,| paid for them, and went away. Newton, who had come mto the shop for some
purpose, but who had been induced to go out of it by the prisoner drawing him out of it,
came back, and, bein^ struck with the fact of Palmer coming there, out of the passing
curiosity which sometimes suggests itself to one's mind, inquired what it was Palmer had
come there for, and. was informed*

Kow> geotlemen^'l «Mpa 'hound to tell you with regard to Newton that there is this
circumstance conneolcfi with his teStiAony. In the first instance, when examined before
the juiT, he stated tonly that part of the stUtement whieh refers to the Tuesday teominj^
when the prisoner was at Hawkins's rtiop; it was only so late as' yesterday he communi-
cated the fact of the prisoner halving bought the strychnia on the Monday night. I hope
I need not sav, as the Crown is conducting this prosecution, that no inducement has be^n
held out to him to make that statement. He will explain, if he is asked, the reason for
his silence ; he has expressed, and will express, contrition at having kept it back ; it will
be for you, when he has. made the statement and explained the motive which induced
him at this lime to withhold it, to say whether you give credit to the statement he so
jnakes, whether he is to be believed or not If you believe Roberts, the assistant of Mr.
Hawkins, on whose testimony no impeachment rests; there can be no doubt on the Tuesday
the prisoner bought six grains of strychnia at the shop of Mr. Hawkins'; and, as I shall
show you presently, on that same night he administered pills to Mr. Cook, after which
Mr. Cook died wi& all the symptoms which are known to result from the administnitio&
of that poison.

However, I now go on to the events of Tuesday, and I will call your attention to
another remarkable circamstance. You will remember I told you Mr. Cook was entitled
to receive the stakes which he had won at Shrewsbury ; on the Tuesday Palmer sent for
Cheshire, and desired Cheshire to bring a receipt-stamp with him. Cheshire, to whom
Palmer owed a sum of 7/., thought he was going to be paid that sum, and he came with
the stamp in his hand. Palmer produced a paper and desired him to draw a cheque on
Messrs. Wetherby in his, Palmer's, favour for 3502., making this curious observation c
** Poor Cook is too ill to draw the cheque himsdf, and Messrs. Wetherbyonight know
my handwriting."- I oan ofier you no solution of that difficulty. Why, the cheque
l>eiDg drawn in his favour, there should be anything to apprehend from the circumstance
of the body of the cheque being in his handwriting, I do not kiiow ; all I can say is that
that passea, that he used that language ^to Cheshire,' and Cheshire then copied on to a
piece of paper the body of a cheque addressed to Messrs, Wetherby, whereby they were
directed to pay the sum. of 300/. to William Palmer, and place the same, as the language
of the cheque .ran, " to my aocount ;" and J^e took that aw^7 to get Mr. Cook's signature.
The. cheque was sent, that night to Messsrs.. Wetherby^ .and returned. Up to this moment
the prosecutjion/ have jaot seen it, .and whether it is.Mn .Cook's signature or not I cannot
tell you. X shall call for its production <wtien the proper time oom^s, and it will be for- the
jprisoner to produce iter not as he shaU' beferdvised. If it is produced we shall be enabled
immediately to ascertain whether it is a 'genuine signature of Mr. Cook or a forgery ; hot
there Is something which ^slsts suspicion ^s to the honesty .of the transaction fr^dn^L'the
fact of Baln^er shrinking from putting his 6wn handwriting in the body of that chie^qftft?.
I shall hereafter follow out its histop^'. |/, .' , , /.'il

In the cbUrse of that indrning coifee'Vas again prepatedf," by the desire of thte ptisoiief,

FIRST DAT, May 14, 1856. 17

for Mr. Cook ; brotli was also sent by him ; and the vomiting was renewed on the Tuesday,
and continned throughout the whole afternoon. Now, on that afternoon a new person is
introduced on the scene. On the Monday Palmer wrote to a person of the name of Jones,
desiring him to. come over to see Mr. Cook. Now, this is a remarkable part of the history
of the case, and one which^ in every point of view is deserving of serious attention. Mr.
Jones was a medical man living at Lutterworth, in whose house, when at home, Mr. Cook
was in the habit of residing. On Sunday Palmer writes to Mr. Jones, stating that Mr.
Cook was taken ill with a bilious attack accompanied with diarrhoea, and requesting him
to come and see him as soon as possible. It may be the fact of his sending for a medical
man may furnish the strongest inference of the prisoner's innocence; it is for you to say
whether this feet, with one or two others of the ^same description, will operate on your
mind in that way. I should not, however, be discharging my duty if I did not suggest it
as being part of a deep design, and that the administration of the irritant poison, of which
abundant traces were found after death, was for the purpose of producing the appearance
of natural disease, which could account afterwards for the death to which the victim was
doomed. It is for you, gentlemen, to say which you think the fair and reasonable inter-
pretation to put upon this act. In the letter. Palmer calls it a bilious attack attended with
diarrhcea : the medical gentlemen, who will be called, who saw the patient while these
fits of vomiting lasted, will tell yon there were none of those appearances, and that it had
the appearance of being produced by some irritant put into the stomach. Mr. Jones, being
uhwell, does not arrive until Tuesday about three o'clock, when he immediately proceeds
to see his sick friend. Palmer came in, and they examined him together ; and, having
been told the man was suffering from a bilious complaint, the first thing Jones does is to look
at the symptoms which might be expected under such' circumstances, but he finds, as the
preceding doctor had found, that the pulse was natural and slow, that there was no fever,
and that the tongue was perfectly clean : he turned round to Palmerj and said, " That is
hardly the tongue of a bilious patient ;" on which Palmer said, " If you had seen it before,
you would have seen what sort of a tongue it was." That evening, about seven o'clock,
Mr. Bamford came as usual, when he found the patient progressing favourably, the sick-
ness having abated. Mr. Bamford will tell you that in his view he showed some symp-
toms of excitement, the pulse had become more irritable, and had got up to between 80
and 90 ; bat Mr. Jones explains that, by saying it was the presence of Mr. Bamford and
the discussion as to the medicine he was^ to take which caused that. Seeing the patient
was somewhat irritable when the medicine came to be spoken of, the three medical men
withdrew into the hall, into which the room opened, and held their consultation. I should
tell you, before they went out Mr. Cook turned suddenly round to Palmer, and said,
" Palmer, I will have no more medicine to night — ^no more pills," making some reference
to the effects of the night before : on this the medical men withdrew. Palmer insisted on
Ms taking the pills, as likely to be beneficial, and said, *' they had better not tell him
what they were going to give him, as he has dn apprehension of their producing the same^
effect as they had last night." Accordingly, it was arranged that the pills should be
made up, and that Mr. Cook should not know what they contained. Mr. Bamford went
to his surgery, accompanied by Palmer, an(f made up the pills as on the previous occasion.
When he had made them up and put them into a box. Palmer aSked him to write upon
them the direction of how they were to be taken. This struck Mr. Bamford as being
extraordinary, because, as Palmer himself was a medical man, and was going to give the
pills to the patient, there could be no necessity for writing the direction, which a medical
man usually does when another medical man does not intervene to see the dose adminis-
tered ; but by Palmer's desire he did write the direction — ** pills to be taken at bedtime."
He put the box into a paper and sealed it up. Three-quarters of an hour elapsed between
the time the prisoner left Mr. Bamford's and came to Mr. Cook. When he did come he
gave Mr. Cook two pills ; but before he gave them to Mr. Cook he opened the box, and
called the attention of Mr. Jones to the direction, saying, alluding to Mr. Bamford's band-
writing, " how wonderful it was that a man of eighty should write so good and strong a
hand." Now, Mr, Jones did not know Mr. Bamfi)rd until that day. He had no parti-
cular interest about it, but the prisoner showed him this handwriting as indicating what
a good hand Mr. Bamford wrote ; the effect being, as you will see, to identify the pill-box
as having come from Mr. Bamford, whereby any suspicion might be allayed wWch the
future events might be calculated to produce. This was about half-past ten o'clock at
night. The pills were then offered to Mr, Cook, who strongly objected to take them,
saying, they had made him ill the night before ; Palmer insisted, and Mr. Cook at last
took them. He vomited immediately afterwards, but did not bring thein up. After this
Mr. Jones went down to get his supper, and it being arranged Mr. Jones should sleep
there, about a little before twelve o'clock Mr. Jones came up from his supper to go to
bed in the room. He undressed and went to bed. He will tell you that in the course of

B

18 TRIAL OF WILLIAM PALMER.

that evening Mr. Cook bad been coDsiderab] j better ; the Tomiting had eeased, his spirits
had return^ he had chatted with him cheerfully, spoken of his future plans, and, in
short, there was nothing which iodicated not only approaching death, but serious diseme.
Mr. Jones went to bed. When he had been in bf^ flfteen or twenty mtoutes he was
roused by a sudden exclamation and scream from Mr. Cook, who had started np, sitting
on hi« bed as he had done the night before, and called out, ** For God's take feteh the
doctor, I am going to be ill as I was last night." The chambermaid, who was called fbr,
ran across to Palmer. In a moment Palmer came to the window. He was told he was
wanted ; that Mr. Cook was ill ; and he said '* he would be dowa directly." He was
across in less than two minutes, and he made the obsertation when he came that *' he
had never dressed so quickly in his life." It will be for yon to say, gentlemen, when yon
hay£ heard the statement, wnether he could have had time to dress. He found Mr. Cook
mamfesting the same symptoms he had shown the night before. He was sitting up
gasping for breath, screaming violently, as he had done before ; his body was convalseo,
his neck began to stiffen, and he implored Mr. Jones to raise him up and rub his neck*
Mr. Jones (Ud so, and Palmer came. He implored Palmer to give him the same remedy
as he had given him the night before, on which Palmer said, ** I will go and fetdi it
He came out and found the chambermaid and waitress in the inside hall, attracted by the
noise of the screaming ; on which Mills said, *' Poor Mr. Cook is the same as last night"
*^ No," said Palmer, ** he is not a fiftieth part as bad as he was: what a game to be at
every night!" Having made this observation, he went out, and almost immediately
returned, and brought two pills with him, which he told Mr. Jones were ammonia. I am
told, in the first place, that ammonia would not be a remedy in such a case ; and, what is
still more remarkable, that ammonia cannot very easily be put into pills. However, he
gave him the pills, which immediately afterwards Mr. Cook threw up into the utensil
which was given to him. Now, gentlemen, I beg to call your attention to the fhot, that
on both these nights he was enabled to swallow during the period of his convulsions,
while the tetanus was upon him. You will find it to be an important &ct where tetanus
is produced by strychnia, lock-jaw — or, as the medical men call it, trismus — ^is occar
sionally a symptom, though not a necessary one, but it only eomes in at the close of the
paroxysms, and is perhaps the last of the tetanic rigor which aStcte the muscles. The
muscles of the throat and the jaw are the last affected. In the affection arising from a
wound, lock-jaw is the first and most remarkable symptom. On both these occasions we
find this man, while all the rest of his body was convulsed with cramps, .capable of swal-
lowing and vomiting, which a man with lock-jaw of course could not do. He swallowed
those pills, bi'ought them up again, and immediately afterwajrds was seised with the most
violent convulsions, every muscle of his body was convulsed, and by degrees the body
began to stiffen out. Of course, as soon as the body beffan to stiffen out, suffocation cob>>
menced. He violcntiy entreated to be raised, as othemvise he should be suffocated. Thev
tried to raise him, but it was impossible ; the whole body had become so stiffened out wita
those fearful cramps, that it was impossible to move it fVom its position ; it rested on the
back of the head and heels, and from that position it could not be shifted. Finding they
could not raise him, he said^ ** Pray turn me over." They did turn him over on his right
side ; he gasped for breath, but could do no more : in a few minutes all seemed to be gm-
dually ending in death. Mr. Jones leant over him and listened to the action of the heart;
the pulse gradually subsided ; all was over, and the man was dead ; end the whole thing,
from the beginiiing to the end, took less time in the action than it has taken me to tell
you in the recital.

This was not idiopathic or tromatic tetanus, a case of hours, — ^but it was a ease ef
minutes ; from the time the first symptoms manifested themselves and the first paroxysm
took place, from that time till all was over did not occupy the space of ten minutea.
Now the body of medical testimony which I shall produce before you will speak poutively
as to this being a death referable only from its symptoms and appearances to tetanua
produced by strychnia, and not to the other forms to which I have already adverted.

Gentlemen, this was on the Tuesday ni^t between twelve and one, an,d the breath
was hardly out of the man's body when Palmer began to think of what was to be done ;
his presence of mind did not forsake him, and he sent Jones out ioto the hall to call in
the female servants. They came, and he asked them to tell him some one who would be a
proper person to lay out the body ; they named two women, and those women were
ordered to be sent for to lay out the body ; they were sent for, and you will hear the
descrij^tion they give of the state of the body after death. When those two women went
in to speak to Palmer, they found him searching the pockets of a ooat, which there could
be no doubt was Mr. Cook's ; they saw him hunt under the pillow and under the bolster ;
they saw some letters^ which there was every i^eason to believe were taken ftom the coat,
put on the mantel-piece; those papeis had not been seen there before. When Cook

FIft&T DAT, May 14, 1856. J'^

came to Bagelef be had, vhat I believe no bett!ng*inan goes vkbont, bis bettmg-book
with him ; thvt fate not been found ; neither that nor a single paper nor any money has
^rer been d&seemered. I will lioUow ap this part of the ease for a moment, thongb it taken
me oat of the terder of tiiAe. Afterwards, on the Thursday, Palmet came again, and
said he wanted to get some boohs and a paper-knife which he had got from'somebody in
^e town for the -use of Mr. Cook, and which he shoitld have to make good and pay for if
not restored; the servant went to the honsekeeper, got &e key, and atoitted ralmer
into, the room. I* oonseqneBce of the servant saying she believed the hoasekeeper had
the bo(4e8, -tibe was sent to inquire abont them, and on her return she fomid him
nmmiagiBg among Mr. Cook's things. When I add to this, what I t^aU prove to have
hafipened at asiA)eeqaeBt period, it wilt be for yon to say what has become of the betting-'
book, whi(^ I shall show to have been on Mr. Cook's dressing-table upon either the'
M(mdAy or the Tnesday night, because one of the servants bad it in her hand, and took
from it a stamp which she gave him to put ou a letter for the post, — that book nor any of
his papers not having been ferthcoming.

Gentlemen, this ends the history on the day on which Mr. Co(& died. I now jpatis
on to tfae noLt day. On the Wednesday Messrs. Wetherby received the letter of Palmer
enelosing the cheque which had been filled in by Cheshire on the Tuesdr^, and in which
Palmer dented -tl^m to send him a cheque for the amount of the 850/. ; they replied that
they had not sui&oieiit funds. It seems at that time they had a sum to Mr. Cook's credit
of ^9/. odd, hot ^ey had not Ainds in hand to meet the 350/. cheque, because at that
time the stakes had not been remitted to them from Shrewsbury'. On that same day,
the 21 St- of November, Palmer wrote a lettet to Pratt in whi^ he refers to his an^tiety
to hanre the horse Polestar, which having just won her race was worth from 1500f. to
3000/. As I (eld you, Messrs. Wetherby, in answer to the letter to them, wrote that they
had not sufficient fifii^S'to pay the cheque, but probably they should have them before the
end of the week. On the Tbnrsday, the 2^2nd, Mr. Frail, the clerk of ^e course at
Shrewsbury, sent them i>p a -sum of 381/. 19»., the net proceeds of the Shrewsbury
handicap stakes, to the credit of Mr. Cook, and in all probability they would have paid
the 350/. cdieque out of that sum, but on the same day Mr. Frail gave them instrnctions
not to pay this money to Mr. Cook, inasmuch as he had paid it to Cook himself at
Shrewsbury ; the eonsequenoe was, they declined to pay the 350/. cheque, and wrote to
that effect. It seems Mr. Frail was under a misapprehension as to -that, but the fact is
not materiid. Messrs. Wetherby having declined to pay the d50/.. Palmer writes to ask
them to pay 75/. to Pratt, and 100/. to another person; this they also declined to do,
stating it was not Hhekr practice to pay parts of cheques.

Pratt, having failed to get the 75/. from Messrs. Wetherby, communicated with
Palmer, and- the latter person on the 24th comes up to London, saw Pratt, and pays him
lOO/. These are sums, recollect, paid by a man who when he went to Shrewsbury races
had no money, and who lost his money there. The next day, Friday, he was again' at
iBugeley, and he again had recourt;e to Mr. Cheshire ; he sent to Cheshire, and desired
him. to eome to him. Cheshire came, and Palmer produced a paper which had (bok's
signatuns to it, whether genuine or not I cannot pretend to s^y. That paper I shall call
for, and when it is prodnecd we shall be enabled to see whether the signature is genuine
or not^; but this document so signed Palmer prbduoed to Cheshire, and he asked
Cheshire. to attest its signature by Cook. Cheshire looked at the paper, which pui^rted
to • be an adcnowledgmeBt by Cook, that 4000/. worth of bills, the dates and circum-
stanoes of n^hich were specified, were bills which had been negociated by Palmer for
C<^!s benefit, and of which he, Palmer, had received no share. As I said before, this
mayor-may not hvre been a genuine document ; the prisoner will be enaUed to satisfr
70U-9B that point, by produeing it when I call for it; but this is perfectly clear, to ask
Cheshire to attssi the signature of a man who had been forty^eight hours dead was on
the faace of it a 'firajid, and can convey to our minds nothing but an inference that there
ivas some fi«nd<dent transaction whioh the prisoner had in his mind when he attempted
to carry oQt that purpose* Cheshire, though he had been the instrument of the prisoner,
and under hk inflnenee to a lamentable extent, as will be proved, and for which he is
XLOW saflbring, declined to do this act, and said, *' Good God I the man is dead! I
should nofe like to aittest ^e signature of a maoi who is dead. If sach a transaction
should eome oat^ and I should have to give evidence of it, I should net like the position."
Palmer smd, ** Never mind, I dare say they will not dispute his signature ; but I thought
it. would look better if it had an arttesting witness to it;" and he took the paper away.
This took place on <i»e. Thursday, or Friday, I am not quite sure whieh, for Cheshire is
not perfectly accurate as- to the date. On the Friday Mr. Stephens, the step-fiither of
Mr. Co(^, came down; he was much attached to Cook, having married the widow of Mr.
Cook's father. When he came he naturally went in the first place to see the corpse, and

B 2

20 TBUL OF WILLUH PilUfER.

be was strack with, the fulness of the &ce, and the general appcstfaftee of the body: it
had not the appearance of emaciation, whieh generally aocompames disease tenninsan^
in death. He made no lemark on it^ he saw Palmer, whom he understood had been ipa
constant intercourse with his son-in<-law to the time of his death. He inqoifed of Palmsr
about CooVsvfBairs. latterly Cook had been a good deal on the turf ; he had nua
through his own money, except some reyersiooary interest he possessed, and his stept-
father had little to do with his pecnniaiy affairs, which he haa managed &t hiBisel&
He inquired of Palmer if he knew anything of Cook's a£Guri^ as he had been on intimate
terms with him ; on which Palmer stated, much to Mr. Stephens^s sorprise, that there
were 4000^ worth of bills out with his name to them, and that he held a paper drawn up
by a lawyer, and signed by Cook, whereby Cook acknowledge he was the only person
primarily liable for those bills ; and Palmer added that he should look to Cook's estate
for them ; on which Mr. Stephens said he was extremely surprised to bear of this : it
was new to him, and all he could say was, there would not be 4000 shillings for the
holders of the bills. Palmer said he hoped he should get the money ; on which Miw
Stephens said, '* If you do you will get it from the Court of Chuieeiy, into which the
affairs will be immediately carried." Mr. Stephens then spoke of the nineval» saying, h»
intended it to take place in London. Palmer expressed his willingness to conduct it;
but Mr. Stephens declined the offer, stating it was his duty; .but that inasnuch as he
intended Cook to be buried in London, t£e body must remain at Uie hotel for two or
three days. Palmer said that was of no consequence, but that it ought at once to be put
in a coffin and fastened down. During some conversation between Mr. Stephens and Mn
Bamford, who was^ in the room, Palmer left, and returned in about half-aunhonr.
Stephens asked him if he could recommend some respectable undertaker, whom, he might
save the necessary directions to prior to the body being taken to X^ondcm ; oa wihio^
Palmer said, ** I have done that already ; I have been out and ordered a shell and a.
strong oak coffin." At this Mr. Stephens expressed his surprise. Dinner having been ia
the mean time ordered, to which Mr. Stephens had asked Mr. Jones and Mr. Bamford^
he thought it a mere act of civility to ask Mr. Palmer to join them at diuneiK*.
Accordingly they dined together. After dinner, previous to Mr. Stephens leavings
turning to Jones he said, '* It is time for me to go ; wUl you be good enough to step up-
stairs and find me any books and papers belonging to my poor son-in-law ? Collect them>.
and bring them down to me, that I may take them away."

Jones left the room to go to the bedroom where the body lay, and Palmer followed
him ; they were absent ten minutes, and came back together. Jones then said in Palmer's
presence, '* I am sorry to isay we can neither find his betting-book nor any papersw'^
'* Not find his betting-book ?" said Mr. Stephens ; *| it must be round ;" on which Pahqer
interposed, and said,. " It would be of no use to you if you could find it ; the bets would be*
void by his deaUi," the fact being, as you know, gentlemen, that they had been received
and devoted to Palmer's purposes. " I do not care for that," said Mr. Stephens, " the*
l^ook must and ^hall be found," on which Palmer somewhat changing his tone said^
'< X have no doubt it will be found." Mr. Stephens on this rang the bell, and when .the
housekeeper came desired her immediately to go. and take possession of whatever .ther^
might be of Mr. Cook's, to look the door, and allow no one to have access to the plac^
until his return from X^don, where he^iad made up his mind to go to obtain the assi^
ance of a solicitor. Before leaving he went to take a farewell view of thebody of .hitf
deceased step-son, and on [taking the hands of the deceased man [to his astonishment
found them firmly clenched, instead of the muscles beio^ relaxed as they usnally are is
death. He said nothing, but immediately left for London with his mindi stropgljt
impressed with the circumstances and facts I have detailed. On his arrival in Londoa
he consulted his solicitor, who gave him a letter of introduction .to Mr. Gardotsfftl-a
respectable gentleman practising in Rugeley. In returning from London^ lOn the^ train
stopping for refreshment at Wolverton, he met Palmer, who was a passenger by ;the.sam<^
train ; the;^ met in the refreshment-room and spoke, and Mr. Stej^ns eMumanioal^ Mb
determination to have a post-mortem examination. Mr. Palmer was particularly anxioua
about it, and pressed him to tell him who were the persons who wovfd h«7e to. make. th#
examination; on that point Mr. Stephens, who perhaps had not mad^wphismind^did
not inform him, but he did, tell him he fully intended to employ a sc^dtoTitc^ipquireinta
his step-son's affairs ; ' on which Palmer offered to recommend him. one* which ^ev
Mr. Stephens declined. On his arrival at Kugeley Mr. Stephens 'Saw:Mr. Gardner,, and
afterwards meeting Palmer he told him he should go the next day to.aee the>ti»iner»
Palmer said, ** I should not advise you to take the solicitor with you.'f Mc« Stephen^
said he should judge for himself as to that.. The conversatio&i was ithen diprected tath^
Ibills, and Palmer sa^d the bills hei«g out waa a.bad busineis«. " WeU» hut," saidMfV
§teph§ii§, f*l have heard ayery different: ver»j<wi of that st$)ry.? .-." WjelV' said iPafcpwt*

FIRST DAT, Mat 14, 1856. 21

** I htfpe Hiril! be utt settled pleasanlSy/* when Mr. Stephens repeiifed what he had sfdd
be^e, that the affair should be put intoChazieerT and settled through the interrelition of
tiie law. Oi ihafrteme day, I. must tell 3rou, ^Palmer had been in London, and fyaid
Mr. Pratt 100/., 75/. on account of interest, and 25/. off the d^t, and had ^ot the
lIMtaiOttmdinn to i^hich I velbrred. In the conversation between them l^tt, who had
beeta strui^k by the expression in Palmer's letter, telling him* not to mention to any one
file snnis he had advaneed to Mr. Cook, asked Palmer what he meaint by that ; Palmer
gave scmie exphmation which did not appear to be a very simple one, and it will. be for
yon to say what was the motive of Palmer in begging and entreating as he did of Pratt
sot to mention to any one the money advanced to Cook. Not only in diat letter he does
that, but he does it also in a letter of the 26th of November, which I find marked
** Stnctly private and oonfidential.** — ^ My dear sir, should any of Cook's friends call on
yon to ask what money Cook had of yon, pray do not answer that question or anv other
aAM)ut money matters until I have seen you." — It being the 26th of November when he
^rote that letter, on the 1st of December he called again on Pratt and paid him another
100/. on account of the 2000/. bill due on the 27th of Octob^, and that closed his trans-
BCtilois with Pratt.

Shortly after this the circumstances became bruited abroad, then came the final crins;
Mr. Padwiek^ who had a warrant of attorney, arrested him, and brought an action against
Ills mother on the acceptances, and then eyerything became known, as might have been
fmticipated. Continuing the narrative : on Sunday the 25th the prisoner went to Mr.
Batnford and aidced for a certificate of the cause of Cook's death. Mr. Bamford said,
'♦ Why should yon ask me ibr it? he was your patient." ** No," said Palmer, " I would
father you gave the certificate." It was discussed what the certificate should be, and
dually it was entered " apoplexy." I am told, gentlemen, Mr. Bamford is upwards <^
SO years'of age, though he still continues to practise. I hope that infirmity may have
been the -cause of his doiog that which certainly at the present moment he cannot attempt
to justify. Mr. Bamford will not tell you that apoplexy ever caused tetanus in this
world ; he will tell you most likely that, in his opinion, the man died of tetanus ; but the
post-ottortem examination will show there is no pretence for saying he died A:om apoplexy.
During the same Sunday the prisoner sent for Newton, the assistant of Mr. Salt, and got
into conversation with him ; after a time Palmer turned it to the subject of strvdmia, and
asked " How much strychnia should yon ^ive if you wanted to kill a dog ? * on which
Newton said, ** From half a grain to a grain." " What appearances should you expect to
ifind in the stomacher intestines after death?" ''None,' said Newton; '*it does not
cause inflammation, or leave any appearance." Mr. Newton will tell you on that an
exclamation of satisfaction escaped from the prisoner's lips. This was on the Sunday
ereening, when the post-mortem examination was to take place the next day, and it did take
place the next day, in the presence of several medical men ; among others was a Dr, Har>-
land, who came from Stafford.- That gentleman on his arrival met Palmer, whom he knew
as a medical man, and said, ** What is this case ? I hear there is a suspicion of poisoning."
^*Oh! no," said Palmer; "he had epileptic fits on the Monday and Tuesday nights, and
yon will find old disease, both of the heart and head." They then went on to Mr.
Immford's, where the other medical men were assembled, and Palmer makes this observa**
tion-^" Here is a queer old man, Cook's father*in-law, making inquiries, and his conduct
to me ia very strange ; X do not know what he wants." Among the medical gentlem^
present was Mr. Newton; and as they were leaving Mr. Bamford's, Palmer said, ^'Thie
will be a dirty job f I wUl go and get a drop of brandy," — at the same time saying to
hisu; " The poor fellow was full of disease ; his throat was diseased^ and he had syphilis."
So that you see, gentlemen, he varies again and again his account of the complaints under
vrhioh Hv. Cook was suffering, .

"- I now come to the post-mortem examination: that was made by a person of the name of
X)evonBhire, a young medical practitioner, in the presence of Dr. Harland, Mr. Arnold,
Mr. M6nkton, Mr. Bamford, Mr. Newton, and the prisoner Palmer. The body was care-
fally examined: it presented the external appearance of death by tetanus; the muscles
-w^re all bent into a state of undue rigidity ; ^e feet distorted, so as to bear the appearance
-of the man having been club-footed ; the hands closed so firmly, that it required force to
open them, when wey closed again ; and the head bent backwards. They then proceeded
to ^en the body^ ana to examine all the important parts connected with the vitial system
4]f man*; they examined the abdomen and liver, and found them healthy ; they examined
the lungsand the kidneys ^ it is said there was a slight oongestion of the latter. The
medical men are not agreed as to whether that is due to anything in the form of disease,
4or to the derangement which takes jdace after death ; but they are all agreed on this,
that there was nothing at all to disturb the functional healthiness of the system, or in the
slightest degree to account for death. They examined the stomach and the intestine

20 TRIAL OH WILLUH PALMER.

•^ the <mly tiling they found wew a few irhite spdit at the large end of dn stomach,
which Uiey say might possibly cause a small ameunt of derangemeBt, hut which cpuld not
m the slightest degoee be qKihea of as the eaose of death. They eiamined aleo that most
important organ, the^ brain, and they found it quite healthy.

I should tell yom geBUemen, here, that in the foUewiag Jaauary the body was exhnmed
W iks purpose of « fuither examination being made into the state af the spinal cord and
aamw, when they were fouad in a most healthy oondition, without the slightest appear*
ance of anything to which death oouhi be attribotabie, and it is a nemarkable ftnt that
even, when taken up in January, though the mnseleB of the trunk had lost their rigidity,
tiie musdes of the hands, fingers, legs, feet, and toes all maintained the same remarkabU
ippearanoes wiiich saanifested themselres immediately after deadi.

Gentlemen, I go back to the post-mortem examination which took place on the
Monday. The stomach and intestines were carefully examined, and no trace of cUsease
was ftmnd : there was no inflammation. The prisoner's attention was diitected to that,
and when he saw that it presented no Appearances at all indicatire of any inflamnurtion
df injury to those psn^, he turned round to Mr. Bamibrd and used more than cnee the
remarkable expression, '* Doctor, they won't hang us yet." The stomach and intestines
Were taken from the body and opened over a jar. Mr. Deyonshire, who is a young prac-
titioner, does not appear to have conducted ^e affair in the most cai>efhl manner : he
ruptured the stomach, and was obliged to tie it up at both ends with a striag; it was
turned inside out, and the stomach was thrown into the mass of matter which eame from
it and was found in the jar. While this was being done« Dr. Harland will fell yon, the
^titoner, who was standing behind Mr. Newton and Mr. Bamford, yery unnecessarily
trashed against them, so much so as to call for remonstrance from Dr. Haria&d. The jar
Was then with its contents covered with parchment, tied down hj Dr. Harland, and sealed.
It '#as then put on one side while the medical men turned their attention to the rest of
the examination. After a minute Dr. Hariand happened to turn round and saw the jar
#as gone ; he itamediately called out " Where is the jar T* On this, eyery body's attention
being directed round the room, at a distance, at a door not properly teading from the
room, stood the prisoner with it ; he said, " I haye it; I thought it might be more eon^
yenient to put H there, that you might have it at hand when you went out." That was a
way out, but it was not the usual way ; on which they immediately called out, •* Pray,,
bring it back." H was brought back, and Dr. Harland and the other ^ntlemen imme-
lately saw two slit* had been cut through tfie double skin with a kniffe— it had been,
mikid, in nobody's hands but his. I am bound to say, gentlemen, whatever had been his
ftttentiott, he had not carried it out so far as to be able to get anything from the jar. The
slits cut by the knife were clean ; nothing had come out of it ; still it is a circumstance
which I am bound to call your attention to, that the jar was found in the prisoner's hands
In a position in which in another minute it might have been out of the room, and two slits
had been cut in the parchment which were not there at the time the jar was tied up.

After that the prisoner is very anxious as to what is to be d(»ne with the jar. Finding-
pr. Harland, who is a most respectable man, a magistrate of the county, was about to take
it away, He remonstrates with Mr. Bamford against its remoyal ; he says, " I do not think
^e ought to let them take away that jar; who knows what they may put into it?" If
this had been said by an ignorant uneducated man, not familiar with the course of conduct
pursued by medical men, there might have been less in that; but taking it as it is, it is
ibr you to say whether this anxiety to step the jar being removed is ^ot an indication of a
ffuilty eondcwude on the part of the prisoner. But, gentlemen, it does not stop there ; the
lar is takexf to Mr. Freer, a snr/^eon at Rugeley. Having been sealed, it is delivered to
Mr. Boycott in a condition in which it could not be tampered with, Ibr it was not only
tied down but sealed, and any interference with it could be discovered. Notwithstanding
that, the prisoner was in the highest state of anxiety that this jar should not reach its desti-
liation. He finds out it is going to be conveyed to London for the purpose of chemical
analysns, and that Mr. Stephens and Mr. Boycott, Mr. Gardner's clerk, are going away
that night by postvchaise to Colwich, there tlo take the train for London ; the ^ was to be
driven by a postboy from the Talbot, of the name of Myatt. Palmer goes to him, and
asks him if it is the ikct that he was going to drive over Mr. Stephens and Mr. Boycott
that night ? on being answered in the affirmative, he says, " I am told they are going to
take the jar with them ; they have no business to take it : I do not know what they may
jmt into it. Could yoir not manage to upset tHe fly, and break the jar ? I will giye you
10/. to do It" Th* man said, " I coidd not thmk of such a thing.* Says he, *•*! will
make! it all right with you If you will." The man said, " I will do no such thing, and I
must go and look after my fly," and so left him. That man is a respectable man; and, as
fhr as I know, he can have no earthly motiye ibr stating such a flict if it be untrue. If it

/

FIRST DAT, May 14, 1856. 23

be true, asd jou believe it, it will be fbr you to say whedier there can be any but one
inference that ftan be drawn from soch a fact as that

Now, gentlemen, I hare gone through the history of this painful case ; there are,

however, one or two other matters of mhior importance- which I ought not altogether to

'pass over, as I think everything connected with the conduet of a man who is conscious

there rests on him an imputation of this kind is more or less material to the inquiry.

After this post-mortem examination it was thought right to faftTe « coroner^^s inquest ; in the

course of that inquiry I find Palmer on two or three occasions sending .presents to the

coroner. It was known the stomach and its contents had been sent to Dr. Taylor and

Dr. Rees of Guy's Hosrpital to be analysed, and that those gentlemen were in coramuni-

cation with Mr. Gardner, who was employed by Mr. Stephens ; a letter comes down from

Dr. Taylor to Mr. Gardner, stating Ithe result of the chemical analysis they had made ;

that letter is betrayed by Cheshire to Pfehner, and Paltaer sits down to write to the

coroner to tell him that Drs. Taylor and Rees had fhiled to find poison in the body,

asking the coroner to take a certain course with regard to the examination of witnesses.

and to call Dr. Taylor. Why should he desire to see the letter which Dr. Taylor had

written iti Mr. Grardner with reference to whether poison or not had been feund in the

intestines unless there was uneasiness on his part ? These are matters which, I think,

ought not to be wholly oyerIo<^ed, but to which I do not desire to attach more weight

thui you think they diraerve.

I mentioned to you thet the prisoner had had no money previous to the Shrewsbury
races, and that he lost money there. I shall show you that after that he was fiush of cash :
he paid 100/. or 150/. into the bank where he banked at Rugeley, and he paid sums of 50?.
each to two or three' persons in that neighbourhood; he was dealing with money right and
left. I shall trace to his possession something like 400/. Cook had 700^. or 800/, on the
Thttrsday mormng when he left Shrewsbury ; none is found. It may be, and I do not say
it is not so, that Cook, who I believe was a eompasnonate, kind-hearted creature — whatever
fiiultfl or follies he may have been led into— compassionating the position in which Palmer
was, may have assisted him with money. I do not know how that ftict is, but I do not wish
to strain the thing too tar against the prisoner. On the other hand, I \lunk no one can
imagine that Mr. Cook, who had nothmg- to look to except the money he had won at
Shrewsbury, and who was looking to that as the means of carrying him through thQ
winter to the next year, should have giren up everything to this man. The money he
took with him to Shrewsbury, the proceeds of the bets, amounting to 100©/., at TattersalFs j
the stakes, amounting to 380/., he was to receive from Messrs. Wetherby : it seems
impossible ^o suppose the man would have denuded himself of everything, and left
himself destitute for the coming winter, for the assistance of Palmer. The case then
stands thus. Ton have a man overwhelmed with pecuniary liabilities, who has resorted
to the desperate expedient of forging acceptances on which to raise money ; who hoped
to meet those acceptances by the proceeds of an insurance made on a very doubtful life :
who is disappointed of that expectation, by the company in which the life was insured
refusing or delaying' payment ; and then he is told by the agent, through whom these
Mils had been discounted, '^You must trifle with me no longer, you must find money,
because these policies have ceased to be an available security, except between you and
your mother. I must use writs ; I will abstain from serving them for a few days, but»
mark ! if you do not find me money within a given period, these writs will be served.** The
nran has ruin staring him in the nice, not merely pecuniary ruin, bat all the punishments
which attach to the-crlme of fot^jery, of which he knew himself to be guilty. He had
ftyrged Mr. Cook's name for 875/. ; and I will show, in another instance, having forged
the acceptance of his mother, he got it discounted, and got Mr. Cook to put his endorse-
laaent on the back of that bill, so that Mr. Cook would have been liable thereupon.

Gentlemen, it is for you to say, under these circumstances, whether the prospect of
getting the 1000/. of the bets would not be a sufficient inducement to lead him to commit
this onence ; but he seems to have had another object in view. No sooner is the breath
out of the dead man's body than he says to Mr. Jones, " I have a claim against him for
3000/. Or 4000/. on bills I have put my name to for his accommodation." He tells the
same story to the fhther-in-law and to Mr. Pratt, and he produces that document to prove
it, which he a^s Cheshire to attest the signature to after the death of the man who is
supposed to hav« sent it. I do not wish to press the matter further than I legitimately
ought ; but the ftct of Mr. Cook having been mixed up in that strange insurance of Mr.
Bates would lead one, perhaps, to the surmise that Mr. Cook was in possession of secrets
relating to the desperate expedients to which this man had resorted for the purpose of
obtaining mone^. It is for you to say whether this combination of motive m^y have led
to theperpetrationof this crime ; but I say that easily arises, supposing the case is balanced
between probttbiUties whish weigh on tiie one- ttde of the other. If yoa believe the evi*-

24 , TRIAL OF WILLIAM PALMER.

dence, that on the Monday night he purchased strychnine, that on the Tuesday morning
he again bought this article ; if you believe the paroxysm of the Monday night and the
mortal agony of the Tuesday night were the result, as mettioal men will tell you, of
strychnine administered to him ; then X show on the Tuesday that the piUs were ad*
ministered by the hands of Palmer, and on the Monday I show that by a degree of pro-
bability that amounts almost to certainty : if that be so, we need not speculale on motive ;
what is there to be set against it? You will be told, and told with truth, no strychmne
was found. The stomach and intestines were submitted to a careful and searching
analysis, and I* am bound to say no trace of strychnine was discovered; but I am told by
high authority that although the presence of strychnine may be discovered by certain
tests, and although the indication of its presence would lead irresistibly to the conclusion
of its having been administered, the converse of the proposition does not hold; it is found
sometimes, at other times it is not : it depends on circumstances. You have heard, and it
will be proved to you, that a most minute dose will destroy life — from half a grain to
three quarters will lay the strongest man prostrate in the pains of death ; but in order
that it shall produce these fatal effects, it must be absorbed into the system. The absorp-
tion takes place in a greater or less amount of time, according to the manner in which the
poison is presented to the absorbents ; if it is presented in a fluid form» it is rapidly taken
up, and produces its effects rapidly ; if it is administered in the form of pills, as the pill
must first be dissolved, and when dissolved it presents itself only to the action of the
absorbent vessels, the effects will require a little time before they present themselves ; and
as the poison is a vegetable poison, the tests which can be applied for its detection ai«
infinitely more delicate and more difficult of application. It is not like a mineral poisoQ,
which may be easily detected and reproduced in specie ; that is xu)t the case with a vege-
table poison : there are, therefore, difficulties accompanying the detection of its presence.
If the dose has been a large one, there is clearly no difficulty whatever ; it kills with so
great a facility, that before the whole has been absorbed into the system, a paroxysm arises
and death ensues. A portion is left in the intestines, which is found hereafter. If the
minimum is applied, the contrary is the case^ and experience shows the theory I am
enunciating is borne out by facts. Experiments have been tried which will be brought
before you which show, where the same amount of the poison has been administered to
animals of the same species in which the tenancy of life may be supposed to be equal, death
will arise in the same number of minutes in the same form, and when the analysis is after-
wards made, the presence of the poison will be discovered in the one but cannot be made
manifest in the other.

Gentlemen, it is for you to say in this case, when you shall have heard the whole
body of testimony I will lay before you, whether the circumstances do nof unerringly
lead your minds to the conclusion that the deceased man, whose death is the subject
matter of this inquiry, came to his death by the administration of that poison, and that it
was administered to him by the hands of the prisoner. There is one circumstance to
which I must advert before 1 sit down, and io is for you to say whether it does not
throw a great light on what would otherwise be involved in darkness. From the Wed-
nesday until the ensuing Tuesday, with the absence of a part of Monday, the deceased
was in a continued state of retching and vomiting ; the analysis made of his body since
his death has failed to produce evidence of the presence of strychnine, but it has not
failed to produce evidence of the presence of antimony. The antimony has been repn>*
duced in specie, and will be laid before you. Who administered that antimony ? How
did it get into his system ? It was not administered by any of the three medical men
who were called in. It was not administered by Dr. Savage. The man never took
antimony with the knowledge of any medical man that attended him, unless it was with
the knowledge of the prisoner. Unless taken in a considerable quantity it produces m9
effect on the throat ; it is soluble, the liquid in which it is dissolved does not indicate
its presence. It was in that man's body ; how did it get there ? It is au irritant which
produces sickness of the form under which Mr. Cook suffered. It is administered in
medicine for that purpose. This man is sick for a week, and antimony is found in his
body afterwards. Who could have administered it ? For what purpose was it admitiis*'
tered ? There again one is lost in speculation ; it may have been originally he intended
to destroy him with it. It may have been his only object was to bring, on the appear-
ance of disease, to enable him to call for a medical man, and account for the death
when it took place. So also with regard to the first dose of strychnine. It may h&ve
been weak on purpose, or by accident.. I am told it is sometimes sold in a diluted fbnn^
bearing only the sixth part of thq strength of strychnine. He may not have intended to
dispose of him that nisht^ The questipn is whether strychnine wns administered on th»
Monday night, and still more on the Tuesday, when the death took- plaice* If you are
satisfied itwas^then remains the question whether itwaj» by the prisoner's. hand- ^the

FIRST DAT, Mat U, 1856. 25

strychnine vas administered. I sball produce the testimony before you to which I have
adyerted, and which, 1 fear, must occupy some considerable portion of your time, but in
such an inquiry time cannot be wasted. I am sure you will give it all your most patient
attention. I have the satisfaction of knowing that the prisoner will be defended by one
of the most able and eminent men that ever adorned the Bar of England. If, in the
end, the evidence £^I to satisfy you of his guilt, or if the explanation offered satisfy you
of his innocence,^ in God's name, let not an innocent man — one who is not proved to be
guilty — suffer.

If, on the other hand, the facts to which I have already adverted, and which I shall
lay before you in evidence, lead you to the conclusion, he is guilty, the best interests of
society and the duty you owe to society and yourselves will demand at your hands a
veidict of gwlty.

EVIDSNCi: FOR THE FROSlSCnTION.

Mr. ISHMAEL FISHER sworn. ^Examined by Mr. Jcams,

Are you a wine-merchant, residing at No. 4, Victoria Street, Holbom ? I am. — Are
you in the habit of attending races, and betting occasionally ? I am.— Did you know
John Parsons Cook, the deceased? I did. — How long had you known him? I should
thmk about two years. — Were you at the Shrewsbury races in November, 1855 ? Yes. —
Do you rettiember the race for the Shrewsbury Handicap ? I do.— Did a mare called
Polcstar, which was the property of Mr. Cook, win that race ? Yes.— On what day was
that race? On Tuesday or Wednesday; Tuesday, the 13th of November. — Did you see
Mr. Cook, the deceased, upon that day ? Yes. — Did you see him upon the course ? Yes.
— 'In what health did he appear to you then ; what health and spirits ? Quite as well as
he had been at any time I bad known him. — You had been in the habit of seeing him at
different races, perhaps ? Yes.

Mr. Baron Alderson. — He was as well as usual, you say? Yes.

Mr. James, Were you stopping, while you were at Shrewsbury, at the Raven Hotel ?
Yes. — Do you know Palmer, the prisoner ? Yes, very well.-— How long have you known
bim? I should think about the same time, or a little more, perhaps, than I have known
^Ir. Cook. — You were staying at the Raven Hotel ? Yes. — Were Mr, Cook and Mr.
Palmer stopping there ? Yes. — At the same hotel ? Yes. — Were they occupying a room
near you ? — ^Yes, the adjoiuiug room. — I believe there was only ■ a wooden partition
between your room and theirs? That was allv— Did they occupy the sitting-room
jointly ? Yes. — Did you see them there together ? Yes, — On the night of Wednesday
did you go into that sitting-room in which Mr. Cook, the deceased, and Mr. Palmer were?
Y'es.

Lord Campbell. — About what hour? Between 11 and 12.

Mr. James, — ^Whom did you find in the room when you went in? I found Mr. Cook,
Mr. Palmer, and Mr. Myatt ; they were the only persons I saw there, — Who was Myatt ?
I believe he is a saddler at Rugeley. — ^Was he a friend of Palmer? Yes. — What were they,
doing 'When you went into the room? They appeared to have some grog before them
each*— Did you observe that Mr. Cook had some brandy-and-water in a glass by him, or
grog* as you call it? Yes. — Were you asked to sit down? Yes. — ^Who asked you to sit
down? Mr. Cook.— Did Palmer say anything to you upon that? No. — Did you sit
down? I -did sit down. — Do you remember Palmer saying anything to Cook in your
pncseace about halving some more brandy-and-water? Mr. Cook asked him to have
some more.— Mr. Cook asked Mr. Palmer to have some more ? Yes. — What did Palmer
say to that? " I shall not have any more till you have drunk yours." — ^What did Cook
sajr then ? He said, " I will drink mine.'' — What did he do ? He took up his glass and
drank it at a draught, or he might have made two draughts of it ; at all events, he drank
it off immediately.-^After he had drunk it did he do anything, or make any observation ?
Yes, he jaid ** There is^something in it." — How soon af^er he had drunk it at a draught as
yoa.s^' P Within a minute. — What more did he say ? " It bums my throat dreadfully,'*
he «aid.r^Upon that did Palmer do anything ; did Palmer hear him say that ? Yes. —
What ^id Pafaner do ; did he do anything ? Mr. Palmer got up and took up the glass. —
What did he do? He sipped up what was left in the glass, and' he said, '* There is
nothing in it."-^Did you observe what there was : what quantity of liquor do you think
was left in the glass when Palmer took it up and said '* There is nothing in it \* what
quantity had been left-by Cook? I should think certainly not more than a teaspoonful. — Had
he sdready emptied the glass? Yes. — ^At this time did a Mr. Read, whom you knew, come
in ? Yes, he came in in the mean time. — ^What i& Mr. Read ? He is a wine-merchant. —

s

26 TRIAL OF WILLIAM PAL-MER.

He attends races, I snppose ? Yes.— After Palmer had, as fon say, put the glass to his
mouth, and said ** There is nothing in it," did he do any thini; with the glass to yourself
and Read ? Palmer handed the gliuss to Read, and asked him if he thought there was any-
thing in it — Did he do anything to you ; did he put the glass to you at all ? Yes, it was
handed to me also. — When Palmer handed the glass to yourself and Mr. Head what did
yon do ? We each said, the glass being so empty, we could not recognise anything. —
Did you ohserre anything at all about the glass ? I said I thought there was rather a
strong scent upon it. — Dia you add anything to that ? No, only I could not detect any-
thing besides brandy; I could not say there was an3rtbing besides brandy.

Lord Campbell. — Did you taste it ? There was no chance of tasting it. — Did yoa

>ut it to your lips? The glass was completely drained. — Did you put it to your lips?

"o. — How could you give any opinion about it ? By the smell.

Mr. James. — Shortly after this did Cook retire from the room ? He did. — About how
long after do you think ? 1 should say within ]0 minutes. — When Cook came back, did
he say anything to you ? Yes. — In Palmer's presence ? No ; he called me 'out of the
room. — ^That is from the room to which he had returned, and where Palmer was ? Yes.
^-He had returned to the room, and then called you from the room, that is from Mr.
Palmer and Mr. Cook's sitting-room ? He had left tbo room and come back and called
me. — He had retired from the room, and had come back and called you out of the room ?
Yes. — I believe you went with him into his utting-Txx>m ? Into my own sitting-room.*^
What state was Mr. Cook in then ? He was very ill ; he bad been very sick. — Did he
tell you so ? Yes. — He told you he had been very ill and very sick ? Yes ; and asked
me to take his money.— Did he state what he had been sulferang from ?

Mr. Serjeant Shee, — I do not know that we can have that.

Lord Cahpbell.— Yes>

Mr. James. — Surely it was a complaint at the time.

Lord Campbell. — There is no doubt that what he said respecting any effect pro-
duced upon him by what he had swallowed, is clearly admissible.

Mr. James, — Did be state from what he was suffering ; tell us all he said to you ? He
said he had been very sick ; and he thought that damned Palmer had dosed him. — You
say upon that occasion he handed you over some money ? Yes. — How much money did
he give ydu ? It was over 700/. ; I cannot exactly remember ; between 700/. and 800/. —
What description of money was it ? All notes. — Bank notes ? Yes. — For what purpose
was it given to you ? To take care of.— Till when ? He did not say till when ; I was to
take care of it. — You say, Mr. Palmer and Mr. Cook occupied jointly a sitting-room ; do
you know whether they had a double-bedded room or not? They did not sleep in the
same room. — After he had given yon this money, did you see him again suffering that
night from sickness ? . Yes ; he was seized immediately after.

Lord Campbell. — Where did you see him ? I saw him in the same room, and in
his own bed-room.

Mr. James. — ^We will come to that presently ; he was seized again with sickness ?

Mr. Baron Alderson. — With vomiting, I suppose ? Yes.

Lord Campbell. — Where was he vomiting ? He was seized with sickness a second
time in my sitting-room.

Mr. James, — Was that after he had given you the money ? Ye8.-*DLd he retire
again to some place of retirement? Yes.— Did he come back to yoa again? Yes.— «-
When he came bade to you after retiring, did he again expfaun to you from, whai he had
been suffering? Yes ; and asked me to go to his bed-room.

Lord Campbell. — When he came back to your room? Yes.

Mr. Jom^s.— Did he again complain- of suffering during the time he was absent? He
repeated what he said berore. — What did he say ? That he had been again very sick. —
Did he make any request to you to eo with him to Ws bed-rdom ? He did. — Did you do
so ? I did. — ^You went up to his bed-room with him ? Yes.— And I believe a Mr. Jones,
who was there, a stationer, went with you to his bed-room ? He did. — ^Whlle you were
there, was he vomiting a^in ? Yes. — Violently ? Yes. — That is in his room to which
you Kftired with him ? les.— Was he so ill that you thought it right to send for &
doctor, Mr. Gibson ? Yes. — Did Mr. Gibson come and attend him ? Yes.— About what
time did you leave him that morning in his room ? We remained with him till 2 o'clock,
or a litUe after.— I believe you- sent again for Mr. Gibson ? Yes.

Lord Campbell. — When? A second time; there might be perhaps 20 minutes
between. — About what hour? I should think Mr. Gibson must have come about half-
past 12 or a quarter to 1.

nRST DAY, Mat 14, 1856. 27

Mr. James. — ^The first oecarion? Yes.-^Was he so ill that you sent for him again?
Tas, we sent tx some second medicine.

Lord Cahpbeix. — When did yoa send fbr him the second time ? About one as near as
I can resMfmber.^He had gone away and yon sent for him a second time ? Yes.

Mr. James. — About 2 o'clock you left him ; was he more composed after he had taken
the medicine? Yes,

Lord Campbell. — Did Mr. Gibson give him any medicine? Mr. Gibson sent the
medicine ; he did not adminitter it himsiiif.

Mr. Jomei, — Wa» there anything you were to administer which the doctor directed
you yoorself to give him ? We gave him the medicine ; the doetor did not give it him
himself. — Did yon gi^ him the medicine which the doctor had sent? Yes.
Lord Campbell. — ^Whom do you mean by ** we*" ? Mr. Jones and myself.
Mr. James, — You gave him the medicine which Mr. Gibson had sent? Yes.— The
next morning did you see Palmer? Yes.— About what time? I should think about
10 o'clock— Where did you see him ? In my own sitting-room. — ^Did Palmer come into
your sitting-room ? He did ; he was there when I got down stairs. — You found him in
your room? Yes. — Did Palmer say anything to you about Mr. Cook when you found
him in your room that morning? Yes.— What did he say ? He said that Cook had
been stating he had given him something last night ; that he had been putting something
in his brandy, or something to that effect. — What else did he say ? He never played such
tricks with people : •* I never play such tricks with people," he said.— Did he say any-
thing about his being drank? Yes, he said, '*! can tell yon what he was; he was
damned drunk."— Palmer said so ? Yes. — Was he drunk ? No ; I should say certainly
not. — Had you, seen him at dinner on the previous evening ? I did not see him at dinner.
— Had yon seen him after his dinner ? Yes ; but it was some time after. — From what
you observed of him,, was he drunk or sober ? Certainly sober.

Lord Campbell.— 'Was he affected by liquor? Not at all approaching drunken*
ness.

Mr. James, — On this Same morning did Mr. Cook come to your bedroom after he had
got up ? Yes ; he came into my bedroom before I was up.

Mr. Bason Alderson. — That was on the same day ? Yes.

Mr. Jam^, — How did he appear to be then — in the morning that is ? He was looking
very ill. — Was he better as regards his vomiting? Much better. — Did you give him
back his money? Yes.— Did vou see Mr. Cook on the raeecourse that day at Shrews-
bury ; that was on Wednesday ? Yes.

Mr. AttanwifGenemL — This is Thursday.

Mr. James, — Yes, Thursday ; did you see him on the race-course On Thursday ? Yes.
—About what time did you see him on the course ? I saw him about three o'clock. —
How did he appear then? He looked very ill. — You say you had known Mr. Cook for
some years ; had you been in the habit of settling his bets ft)r him ? Always ; I mean
when he did not settle tiiem himself — When he did not settle them himself you were in
the habit of paying and receiving for him at TattersalX's and other places ? Yes. — I do
not know whether you saw Cook s betting-book at Shrewsbury in his possession or not ?
Yes; I did see his book in his hand. — What sort of a book was it; will you give a
description of it? It was a little more than half the size of this (a small memorandum
book), — What colour was it? I could not remember: as nearly as I can remember it was
very near this colour (a dark colour). — On the 17th, which was Saturday, did you pay to
Mr. Pratt by direction of Mr, Cook any sum of money? Yes, the 17th. — How mueh
did yoa pay to Mr. Pratt ? 200^^ in a cheque.— The account of what he had won or lost
at Shrewsbury in the ordinary course would have been settled at Tattersall's on the fol-
lowing Monday ? Yes. — Monday, the I9th ? Yes. — ^As his agent did you expect to have
to settle that account ? I did. — You advanced the 200L upon the Saturday to pay Mr.
Pratt ? I did,^-You knew he had won at Shrewsbury considerably ? 1 did. — If you had
had hia account in the ordinary course to settle at Tattersall's on the Monday, should
you Jiave been entitled to have deducted the 200/. you advanced upon his account to Mr.
Pratt ? . Clearly .—Was tiiat the eounc of dealing between you ? Yes. — You did not
settle that account as it turned oat ? No. — ^And consequently conld not repay yourself
hat advanoe ?

Mr. Serjeant Shee, — Let him teil the story ; do not suggest to him what he is to say%
You a^ed just now " Do not you believe he had won considerably at Shrewsbury ? ''

Mn>Jam0t.-«-He had said, se befbre. Did you know that he had won considerably at
Shrewsbury ? I did.

28 TBUL OF WILLIAM PALMER.

Crois^xaxnioed by Mr* SerjecaU Shit,

How long had you known Mr. Cook? About two years. — Had you known Mr.
Palmer about the same time ? A little loii^F.'**^Had you known that they were a good
deal connected in racing transactions ? ie8.-^Do you know thai they were, in point of
fact, frequently partners?

Mr. Attomey^General.'^liow do you know anything of the kind ?

Mr. Serjeant Skee. — ^He had settled with them.

Mr. Attorney-General, — Did you ever settle with them jointly ?

Mr. Serjeant Shee. — Did you ever settle any transactions for Mr. Cook in which it
came to your knowledge while settling them that Mr. Palmer was jointly interested with
him? I do not remember anvthing. — Do you know whether they owned any horses
jointly ? I do not know. — Did they appear to be very intin^ite ? Yes.-r'W'ere they a
great deal together ? Yes. Were they generally staying at the same hotels ? Yes. — •
Were you at the Worcester meeting? No. — ^You say you knew that Cook won consi-
derably at Shrewsbury ? Yes. — You knew that Polestar was his mare 7 Yes. — ^Did j^ou
know whether Palmer also won? I did not. — You do not know? No. — ^At what time
did these races begin on Tuesday ? I cannot answer to the hour. — ^About ? They gene-
rally begin about two. — How soon after that, about, did Polestar run ? I cannot answer
the question. — Was it an hoar or two after? I should think about an hour after the
races commenced ; as to the time I will not undertake to say.

Lord Campbell. — ^Polestar would run about 3 o'clock, then ? I should think so,
Mr. Serjeant Shee. — Did you see Mr. Cook after the race on the course ? I did.-^Did
he appear very much elated ? Yes.— Gratified? Yes. — Was it a good race, a near thing?
She won easy. — ^You say you went in the evening into the room in which Mr. Cook and
Mr. Palmer were ; you say, I think, that Myatt was also there? Yes; a man I bellevo
to be Mr. Myatt. — Did you see what glasses were on the table ? I remember seeing a
glass before Mr. Palmer and before Mr. Cook : I could not answer for Myatt's glass ; he
was sitting in the comer by the fireplace. — Was there a decanter on the table? Yes, I
believe there was. — More than one ? I do not know ; I think not. — Did you observe
sufficiently the glasses to see whether both had been drinking ? 'No. — You were asked
to sit down by Mr. Cook ; . was a glass ordered for you ? Yes ; he asked me to take
some. — Was a glass ordered for you ? Yes ; directly I sat down 1 believe there Was
some more bra-ndy ordered. — I do not know if you did take any ? I think not; I do not
recollect drinking any: — You cannot say positively ? I do not recollect taking anything.
— You ma^ have taken one glass, then ? I was not tipsy ; I do not think I drank any^
thing; I will not swear I did not. — You would be likely enough, I suppose, to take a
glass of brandy ? Yes, I like brandy-and- water. — My learned friend reminds me that
.you are a wine^merchant ; you are a good judge of it by the smell, are you not? I
should be ; I believe so. — Did you smell this glass ; and did you not say, when you had
smelt it, that it had a strong smell about it, but you thought there was nothing in it^
nothing at all unlike brandy ? Yes, I said so.

Lord Campbell. — What did you say ? I said I thought there was nothing in it.

Mr. Serjeant' Shee. — I believe gentlemen in your business are enabled by experience to
judge a good deal of the quality of brandy by the smell? The glass was so perfectly
empty, it had been so completely drained, that there was very little to smell in it.— ^Did
you count that money ? Yes.— Had you been at the Unicom that afternoon ? In the
evening. — What time in the evening ? I should think quite an hour before that occurred,
before I went into that room, perhaps more. — Had you dined at the Raven? Yes. —
What time had you dined ? We generally dined about 6 ; I will not swear that 1' dined
exactly at 6. — I do not expect you to fix to an hour, or a quarter of an hour ? Between
6 and 7, most likely. — Do you know if Mr. Cook dined there ? I cannot say.— Did you
see him then, or in the afternoon after ? I do not recollect seeing him till I saw him at
the Unicom. — You do not recollect seeing him after the race tin you saw him at the
Unicom ? No. — Do you know that Palmer left Shrewsbury immediately after the race?
There was a report of that kind ; I do not know it. — You did not see him after the race
that day any more ? No.-^You saw Cook at the Unicom ; at what time did yott see
him at the Unicom ? I saw Cook, and Palmer too, at the Unicom. — That was Wednes*
day, was not it ? It must have been Wednesday night.

Lord Campbell. — You asked him if it was the Unicom ; I thought it was the same
night you were speaking of at tibe Raven ? It was Wecbesday night, the same night be-»
fore I saw him at the Raven.

Mr. Serjeant Shee. — I asked you if you dined at the Raven; you said you did at
about six o' clock : you <Ud not see Cook at the Raven, but you saw him at the Unacom

FIRST DAY, May 14, 1856: 29

late in the evening : what time late in theeTening of Wednesday did you see him at the
Unicom?

Lord CA]iPBEcii.-*-This was on Wednesday evening? Yes, ou Wednesday evening j
I 8faoiil|lithiBl& abool nine o'oiook, or between nine and ten.

Mr. Serjeant Shee, — ^Was he drinking then ? I cannot say ; I merely looked into the
room and stepped back again. — Did you see who were in the room ? I saw Mr. Saunders,
the t-v.iner, with Mr. Palmer and Mr. Cook, and a lady .—Did they appear to have glasses
of drink before them ? I cannot say. — Do you know whether it happened to a good num-
ber of people to be ill at Shrewsbury on that Wednesday or Tuesday ? — No, I do not
know that — You did not hear of it ? No. I had a friend who was rather poorly there,,
but a different kind of illness to Mr. Cook, not at all serious. — You do not know of many
people connected with the races having felt ill and complained of illness ? No. — What
sort of a day was Wednesday ? Rather dull. — ^W^as not it a very wet day ,• under foot, I
mean? It was damp under foot I remember ; I do not know that it rained. — Did you see
Mr. Cook about the race-course the whole of that day ? On Wednesday ? — Yes. I saw
hina several times.-r-What sort of a day was the Thursday ? I remember the weather
was rather cold and damp ; whether it rained or not I cannot say ; I think we had some
rain on Thursday, but I will not swear. — Do you know whether Cook and Palmer break-
fasted together On the Thursday morning ? I do not know, but 1 believe they did. — Did
you see them on the course together in the course of the Thursday ? 1 cannot say I saw
them together. — ^Do you know if they left Shrewsbury together? No, I do not.

Mr. Attorney-General — They came to Rugeley together, you may take that.
Mr. Serjeant Shee. — ^I believe on the 16th of November or the 17th of November you
receivedf a letter from Mr. Cook, did not you? I did. — Have you got it ? The solicitor
has it. — ** Kugeley, 16th November, 1855?" It was received on the 17th. — It is dated
Rugeley ; " Dear Fisher, it is of very great importance to both Mr. Palmer and myself
that the sum of 500/. should be paid to a Mr. Pratt, of Queen Street, May Fair, to-mor-
row, without fail. 300/. has been sent up to-night, and if you will be kind enough to pay
the ot^er 200/. to^-morrow on receipt of this you will greatly oblige me. I will settle it
on 'Monday at Tattersairs. I am much better." ^

. Mr. Baron Alderson.— You received that on the 17th; where? No. 4, Victoria
Street. — ^In London? Yes.

Mr. Serjeant Shee, — ^After having told me you received that letter, tell me whether you
do not know that for some time before they were jointly connected in racing transac-
tiona ? I considered they were, but there is no proof of it.

Re-examined by Mr. Attomey'Generqil.

Am I to understand you to say that they were partners, or anything of that kind?— I
did not say so. — I want to know- if you intended to say so ? No. — You say they had been
intimate and staying at the same hotels : have you known any interruption of the inti*
xoacy, any change of feeling on the part of Cook towards Palmer ? I could always tell
that Cook had no great respect for Palmer. — I do not exactly ask you that ; did Cook
at any time complain to you of Palmer : do not tell fxiQ what he said ? I have heard him
speak/ rather disrespectfully of him. — You say the Polestar ** won easy ;'* was it a
ba^cap race? Yes. — My learned friend asked you whether Palmer won; did you
hapi>e^ to know whether Palmer had a horse then called Chicken ? Yes. — Did
Qhickfen^ run? Yes.— -On which day? The last day.— That would be the Thursday?
Yes.— ^iWd Chicken win or lose ? Lost. — ^Do not tell me if it is not within your per-
souat knowledge : I ask you with regard to your own knowledge, do you happen to know
^hytfeer, Palmer had bets upon that race? I heard so.-^My learned friend has asked
you '"^fhjbther Cook was much elated by winning the race when Polestar won j was he
more '^ated than people usually are ; was there any difference between him and anybody
else t ' N6t moi'e so than people generally are. — You were staying at the Raven, I under-
stahdi^ 'Yes,

. Ixvpp C>^B^P3ii^i;x,-^Not more elated than people usually are ? No. .,
"^ILt^: Attorney Gmerah — Did you take any brandy-and- water ? I do not recollect
wiietiief I took aoy at<tbe £rst time you are speaking pf.-*-I mean in the hotel ; you and
your friends who were staying with you ? I am not sure that Idjrank any brandy-and-
w»t^r. ••,..,

.. . ^ ,... THOMAS JONE§ sworn.— Examined by Mr, TT^jfeSr^..

I believe you are A law stationer in Carey Street? Yes.-**<W«i« you at Shrewsbury
raceftFh9i8t i^ovembet? Ye«. — Ydu lodged at theB^venJ bolide? I did. — On what
dbaj 'did) yidu get there ^ on tkie Moi^ay ? Oa^ the Monday xug^t,;~*OB that night did .

30 TRIAL OF WILLIAM PALMER.

Cook sup there with you and Mr. HerriDg ? Yes. — ^And Mr. Fisher ? Ye8.-*~And a
p^^-son of the name of Gravatt, I believe ? Yes. — ^Did he appear well ? Yes. — ►Did you
see him on Tuesday or Wednesday again ? I did. — ^Did he appear quite well on those
days ? Quite well. — ^Did you and Mr. Fisher go to the Raven late on Wediiesday night,
between eleven and twelve ? Between eleven and twelve o'clock. — Was Mr. Head also
with you there in the same room ? Yes. — Did Mr. Cook come into yoiH* room and invite
you into his ? He did. — ^I believe you went there and found among others Palmer there ?
I did not go into the room with Mr. Fisher and Read, I went up stairs first. — You went
there and found Mr. Palmer there and other persons ? Yes. — After the party broke up
do you remember Mr. Fisher coming to you, and telling you something about Cook ?
Yes. — Inconsequence of that did you go up into Cook's bed-room ? I did. — ^Did you find
him complaining of anything? Yes. — ^What? He complained of a burning in his
throat. — Anything more ? And he was vomiting.

Lord Campbell.— Did you see him vomit ? I saw him vomit.

Mr. Welsby, — ^Wa« some medicine brought? Yes. — Some pills and a draugrht, I
believe ? Some pills and a draught. — Did Mr. Cook refuse to take the pills ? Yes. — In
consequence -of that did you go to the doctor, Mr. Gibson ? Yes, I went to the uDedical
man ; I do not know his name. — Did you get some liquid medicine from him ? I did,-^
Did you bring it back and give it to Mr. Cook ? I did, a portion of k.^—About bow
much ? About a teaspoonful I think ; a small quantity I put into a wine-glass, and
added some water to it. — ^Was be then in bed ? He was. — I believe alter that he to(^
the pills also ? He did, about a quarter of an hour after. — Did you then leave him ?
Yes. — Did you see him again the next morning ? I did. — >About what time ? It was
early ; it was between 'six and seven, I think. — How did he appear then? He was still
in bed, and he told me he felt easier and better than he did on the previous night. — How
did he look ; did you observe ? No, I did not notice particularly ; lie looked pale and
appeared to be unwell.

Mr. GEORGE READ sworn.— Examined by Mr. Bodkin.

Do you live in Victoria Street, near Fanringdon Market ? I do. — I believe yoa keep a
house there frequented by sporting men ? I do. ~^ Were yoa acquainted with the deceased
Mr. Cook ? Yes, I wag. — ^And wkh the prisoner Palmer? Yes. — Did yoa see them at
Shrewsbury races in November ? I did.— Were you there on the Tuesday at the races ?
I was. — Did you see them both on the course ? Yes. — Did you see Cook more than once ?
I did ; I had one bet with him. — Did Cook on that Tuesday appear to be in his usual*
health ? Yes, as well as I had always seen him. — Were you on the course on the follow-
ing day, the Wednesday ? I was. — Did you see him there then ? Yes, I did. — Did he
appear to be in the same state of health ? Apparently so. — What house did you stop at
during the races? The Raven. — Did you, on that Wednesday night, go into the room
where Palmer and Cook were staying at the Rav.en? I did. — About what time?
Between the hours of 11 and 12, I should imagine. — Was any one else in the room when
you went in besides Cook and Palmer ? Yes, there was another gentleman, I believe ; or
there may have been more than one ; I think there were more than one. — Did you notice
what they were doing? No, I did not: one gentleman was sitting on the so&; and I
saw Mr. Cook standing up, and Mr. Palmer also standing up. — What took you into the
room ? Merely the usual practice before we retired to bed t Ve were living in adjoin-
ing deeping rooms : we usually had a glass of brandy-and- water before retirii;^ to rest. — •
Did you have any brandy-and-water there? I did. — ^In that room? Yes. — Was the
brandy-and-water there when you got in, or was it called for afterwards ? It was there. —
Whilst you were there^ did Cook complsun of anything ? Yes, he did ; I saw he was in
pain. — How soon was that after ;f ou entered ? Almost immediately. — When you observed
that he was in pain, did you put any question to him ? No I did not ; I heard him say
to Mr. Palmer that there was sometfdng in the brandy-and-water. — ^Were those the
words he used ? As nearly as I can remember. — ^He said so to Palmer ? In fact he was
addressing us all at the time. — Had you observed Cook to drink any of the braiidy>aud-
water before he made that observation ? No, I had not. — What next happened after
Cook said that ? Mr. Palmer handed me the glass to taste from it.~?<What was in the glass ?
Nothing. — Did you make any observation to Palmer upon that ? Yes, I said, ** What is
the use of handing me the glass when it is empty?" I replied that to Mr. Palmer. — Did
you observe whether Cook men remained or left the roona ? I believe he left the room.
— Did you see anything more of Cook that night ? I did not. — ^Did you see him on the
following morning? I did. — At what time? 11 o'clock in the morning, I should
fsiacy.— Was he up or in bed ? Up. — In his bedroom, or below ? In his sitting-room.-—
Did he make any complaint to you about himself? Not to me directly : he said he was
very ill ; I heard him say to Mr. Herring and Mr, Howard that he was very ill. — ^He
said that in your hearing ? Yes.

FIUST PAY, Mat U, 1866. 31

Oross-examined by Mr. Seryeasit Shde,
Was it that he was reiy ilt en* that he had been rery ill ? That he iras very ill. —
You say that on the Taesday he was as -well as yoo had always seen him ? He was.—
Was he generally in good health ? I shonld consider that he was in a delicate state of
health in the usual way ; he always had a pallid eomplexion with him, and did not look
like a strong man*«-^He appeared to you to be in a delicate state of health? Ye8.-*>I)id
you know enough of him to know that he had been in the habit of comphdning of being
unwell ? Nevor to my knowledge.

Mr. Babon Atj>BRSON. — ^You had some of the brandy-and-water yourself ? I had.«—
IHd it dwagree with you ? Not at all.

He-examined by Mr. Attomey-GeneraL

Where was your brandy^nd-water ^ from ? From the hotel. — Was it from any that
was in the room at the time >'oa went in ? There was another decanter sent &r imme-
diately after I went into the room ; it was not likely that we should take it from that.

Lord CAMjPBBJiL. — It was brought in by the waiter ? Yes.

Mr. Attomey-GeneraL^-YKm say that Cook was rather a delicate man in point of
health ? In appearance. — Did you ever know anything specifically the matter with him ?
Nothing whatever. — Then all you mean is, that he had the appearance of not being a
strong man ? Yes. — Was he in the habit of attending races generally ? I think every
race. — ^And I suppose he was in that pursuit exposed a good deal to ;the open air — out
coostautly ? The same as the rest of us. — Had you known him at any time to be inter-
rupted by Ulness from following that pursuit? No, I had not.

Mr. WILLIAM SCAFE GIBSON sworn.— Examined by Mr. Evddlestm,

Are you assistant to Mr. Heathcote, surgeon at Shrewsbury ? I am. — On the 14th of
November last were you sent for to the Raven hotel at Shrewsbury ? I was. — ^Wbat time
did you get there ? Betwixt 12 and 1. — At night ? Yes. — ^Did you there see Mr. Cook?
I did. — ^Where was Mr. Cook ? In his bed-room. — ^Was he in bed ? No. — ^Did he make
any complaint to you of the state in which he was ? He did ; he complained of pain in
his stomach and heat in his throat ; and he likewise told me that he thought he had been
poisoned. — ^Did yon feel bis pulse ? Yas ; his p«lse was about 90^ — Did you look at his
tongue ? I did ; it was perfectly clean .--^What else ; did he si^ anything? He appeared
very much distended about the abdomen. — ^What did you reoommend him? An emetic ;
and he said that he could make himself sick with warm water.-— I believe you sent the
waitress for some warm water? I did. — ^Was the warm water brought? Yes; about
three quartern of a pint. What was done with it? I reo(Mntmended luin a feather, and
he said he could make himself sick with the handle of a tooth-brush.

Lord Cahfbeix.— -Which he did ? Which he did.

Mr. HMUestcn^^^VfYoiX did he do ; did he drink the warm water ? He drank all of it.—
You say that he said he ooald make himself sick with the handle of a tooth-brush ; did he
do so ? He did. — ^Then he was sick ? Yes ; what came away was nothing but water ; it was
perfectly dear.— I believe you then told him that you would send him some medicine ?
Yes. — I believe you did send him two pills and a draught by Read ? I did. — What did
the pills consist of? Compound rhubarb pills and calomel ; it is in the Pharmacopceia. —
How many grains ? About three grains of calomel. — ^With the directions that they were
to be taken immedhitely? Y^.— And the draught some twenty minutes afterwards?
Yea.— What did th« draught consist of ? Mistura sennacum ; it is known to all medical
men. — ^An ounce and a half of compound of aenna ? Yes.

Lord Camfbeul — It is senna ? I believe it is composed of an infusion of senna,
sulphate of magnesia, and aromatic spirits.

Mr. Baron Alderson. — It is what is called a black-draught.

Mr. //tM/d/£$f<m.— Did you afterwards, that same night» Bee Mr. J<mes? I did.— *^How
long was that after, you bad give* the pills and the draught to Bead ? It could not have
been much more tnao half an hoar. — ^Did you give Mr. Jones any medicine for Cook ?
I did ; I gave him an anodyne draught and paregoiric.'~*Jast tell us what that medioine
consisted of.

Lord CAMVBXLb. — Thkm is no occaaon for l^t.

Mr. Bvddiestcn. — ^That I believe was divided into two draughts? Yes. — Did you see
Mr. Cook again after that? Mr. H-eathcote saw him the next morning. — Did you see
him ? No.~ You did not see hhn after that evening ? No, I did not see him after the
time I was there.

Cross-examined by Mr. Serjeant Shee*

Did yon form an opinion what was the matter with him? I went to work and treated

32 TRIAL OF WILLIAM PALMER.

it as if lie had taken poisoD. — ^Ton took him at his word? Yes. —Yon did not observe
anything in what he yoinited which should lead you to think so ? Nothing at all in what
he vomited. — ^Did von observe any symptoms from which yon could infer that he had been
taking any poison r He had pain. — ^That is not very uncommon, is it ? No. — Did he
appear to you ta have been drinking? He appeared a little excited; he was quite
sensible of what he was doing and what he was saying. —But there was the sort of
excitement which is produced by drink ? Yes ; the idea of taking poison would have
some effect upon his brain. — You say he appeared a little excited ? Yes. — Do you mean
that he appeared a little tipsy ? No, not tipsy.— But excited by drink ? Yes, the brain
was stimulated with the brandy>and- water. — In your judgment was what you prescribed
for him a good thing if he had taken poison ? I should say it was, accordmg to the
symptoms that he suffered under. — Would it not be the better way to get it up at once,
as quickly as possible ? He drank all the warm water that I gave to him. — ^You did give
him a good deal of warm water ? Yes, I gave him three-quarters of a pint.
Lord Campbell. — ^Did you think that it cleansed the stomach? Yes.

Mr. Serjeant Shee, — ^And yon thought the calomel was advisable in addition ? Yes, on
account of his bowels being so distended ; he was rather confined.

Be>examiued by Mr. Attomey-Oeneral,

'Did you find any bilious symptoms about him ? No.

Mr. Serjeant Shee,— Did. you see anything like bile in the basin ? No, not iu tlie
basin, but on the edge of the basin there was some which he threw up ; it must have been
thrown up before.

Mr. Attomey-General.'-WhAt quantity of bile did 'you see ? About the sise of a pea. —
The water that he threw off after you got there, I understand you, was perfectly clear?
Perfectly clear. — And his tongue. I think you say, was perfectly clean ? Perfectly clean.
— Is that usually the case in a bilious attack ? If his stomach had been wrong any length
of time it would have been discoloured.

Mr. Attome^'GeneraL — Ann Brooks, my Lord, would come here in the order of wit-
nesses, but she is not here ; I must therefore postpone her examination until to-morrow.

ELIZABETH MILLS sworn.— Examined by Mr. James,

Were you the chambermaid at the Talbot Arms at Rugeley in November last ? Yes.—
How long had you been in that service ? About two years. — Did you know the prisoner ?
Yes.— wits he in practice as a medical man at Rua:eley ? I do not know about that 4 I
know that he was considered a medical man. — ^Was he in the habit of coming to the
Talbot Arms? He was. — ^Did you know Mr. Cook who died there? Yes. — ^Do you
remember upon what evening Air. Cook came to the Talbot Arms in November? The
15th, Thursday. — ^About what time on the Thursday did he come? Between mne and
ten I believe. — At night? Yes. — ^Did any person come with him? Mr. Palmer.—
Palmer the prisoner ? Yes. — He came in a fly ? Yes. — ^What time did he retire to rest
on that night? Between ten and eleven; about half-past ten. — Did he complain at all*
when he arrived of having been ill ? He had been poorly, he said, and was poorly then.
— >Did he say so ? Yes. — ^Did he say where he had been poorly ? He had becA poorly in
Shrewsbury. — Did Palmer leave him there, or stay with him at sdl that night ? I do -
not remember seeing Palmer in the house at all after he had got out of the fly. — ^Did Cook
get upon the following day, the Friday, and go out? About twelve, I think; I took
him some hot water about twelve ; I believe it was about one when he wentout^^—How
did he appear then to be ? P<x>rly ; he felt no worse, he said; still he was not well.««?^.
About what time did he come home that night to the Talbot Arms? About ten.— Did he
make any remark about himself when he returned ? When he went to bed he did ; about,
half an hour, I believe, after he came in he went to bed ; about half-past ten. — ^What did
he say about himself, and where he had been ? I asked him if he felt any worse than he
did when he went out ; I asked him how he was. — ^What did he say ? That he felt no
worse. — ^Did he say where he had been, or what he had been doing ? Yes ; he had been
to Mr. Palmer's, and had dined there. — ^Was he sober or intoxicated at that time ? Sober.
— ^Perfectly? Perfectly. — ^Did he ask you for any candle? Yesj be asked me for
an extra piece of candle to read by. — ^Then you saw no more of him, I believe^ that
night ? No. — ^Upon the Saturday morning did Pahner come ov^, do yon lemember, the
next morning? Yes; he was over, but I do not exactly know the time. — ^About what
time did he come over ? Perhaps about eight it might be when I saw him«

Lord Campbell. — Palmar lived opposite, to the Talbot Arms ? Yes.

Mr. James, — ^To your knowledge did Mr. Cook send for Palmer or not, or how came
Palmer over? I do not know that; not to my knowledge. — ^When Palmer came over
did he order him anything, do you remember ? A cup of coffee. — For whom ? For

FIRST DAY, Mat 14, 1856. 33

Mr. Cook.— IMd he order It in your kitchen at yonr house ? No ; I helieye he ordered it
of me.— Did you giye it to Palmer or to Mr. Cook ? I belieye I gare it to Mr. Cook.—
Was Palmer in the room when you gave it to Mr. Cook ? I believe he was. — ^You took
it up to the bedroom ? Yes. — And Palmer was in Cook's bedroom ; was that so ? Yes.
—Did yea see Mr. Cook drink it, or did you leave it there? I l«ift it there. — Where did
you place it? In his hands. — In Cook's hands or Palmer's hands? In Cook's hands. —
When yon went op stairs, did you observe whether the coffee had been vonjited into any
utensil ? The coffee I believe was vomited.

Lord Campbell. — ^When you did go up, Jrou gave it to Cook? Yes. — Then I suppose
you went down stairs ? Yes.

Mr. James, — You did not see Cook drink it while you remained there, but you placed
it iu his hands ? Yes. — How soon afterwards was it that you went up into the room and
found that the coffee had been vomited into some utensil ? I cannot remember. — ^About
how long ; half an honr or an hoar ? It might be an hour or it might be a couple of
hours. .

Lord CiKPBELL. — When you went into Cook's room what did you observe ? The
coffee io the chamber utensil. — Where was the chamber utensil ? On the table by the
lide of the bed ; he conld reach it himself. — Did you observe that the coffee had been
Tomited into it ? Yes.

Mr. James, — Did yon speak to Palmer at all about this ? I cannot remember that I
did.— Or he to you r I cannot remember now. — Did you observe any large jug with
toastsnd-water in it in the bedroom that morning or during that day ? No, I did not see
the tosst-and- water myself. — Did you observe a jug there ? I did not. — Did you observe
any jug there ^hat day that did not belong to the Talbot Arms ? A jug was sent down,
I believe, from the room' to me, to make some more toast-and- water; it was not given
tome.

Lord Campbell.— When did you first see the Jug? On the Saturday night ; it wpuld
he as late as lO o'clock.

Mr. James. — A jug was sent down to you for what purpose ? Por some fresh toast-
and-water. — From Cook's room ? Yes.

Lord Campbell. — ^Who brought it down ? The waitress, I believe, brought it down

stairs.

Mr. James, — ^What is her name ? Lavinia Barnes. — For you to make some fresh toast-
and-water, I think you said ? . Yes ; She said that she had thrown out the crust of bread
which was in the jug. — Did that jug belong to the Talbot Arms or not ? No. — You are
quite sure of that ? Quite. — And that was brought from Cook's room ? Yes. — How often
was Palmer, to your knowledge, in Cook's room during that Saturday ? how frequently
^d you see him there ? I cannot remember ; he might come and go without my seeing
him.— But how often do you think you saw him there during that Saturday ? Perhaps
four or five times. — In Cook's room, I believe ? Yes. — You saw him in Cook's room or
go into the room ? Yes, or at the door, either going in or coming out, sometimes in the
nxxn.— Did you hear Palmer say anything, or did Palmer say anything to you about
sending Cook over some broth that day ? I heard him say to Mr. Cook that he would send
over some. — Do jou remember any broth coming over ? did you see it yourself or not?
I saw the broth m the kitchen ; I did not see it brought over ; it had been sent over, they
aid, by Mrs. Kowley. — ^You saw the broth that some person had brought ? Yes. — ^Wag
that broth made at the Talbot Arms kitchen ? The cook told me that it had come over
from Mrs. Bowley. — ^Yon must not tell us what the cook told you ; had that broth been
made at the Talbot Arms ? No. — ^Did you yourself take the broth up to Cook that day ?
The second time I did.

Lord Campbell. — ^What do you mean by *' the second time " ? I believe as soon as
the broth came in my fellow-servant the waitress took it up stairs.

Mr. Jasnes. — Lavinia Barnes ? Yes ; she took it up to him, and he refused to take it.

Mr. Serjeant Shee. — ^You must not tell us that.

Mr. James, — ^We will prove that by her. (To the witness) You took it up later in the
day? Yes. '

Lord Campbell. — To Mr. Cook's room ? Yes.

Mr. JarMs, — After, as you believe, Lavinia Barnes had taken it up to him, did you meet
Palmer? Yes, on the stairs. — About what time was that? About ten minutes or a
quarter of an hour after the broth came over. — From whence was Palmer coming ? He
was coming up the stairs I believe, and I was coming down. — He was coming up to
Cook's room from his house ; what did Palmer say to yon ? He asked me had Mr. Cook

o

84 TRIAL OF WILLIAM PALMEB.

had bis broth. — What did you say to him? I told hin that I was iio4 aware thai thete
was any cone foi: him.— While this conyersatioii was going on did the waitress Lavinia
Barnes come forwatrd ? Yes. — Where did she come from ; some room I suppose ? Yes,
oat of the commercial room. — Did she say anything to Palmer ? I beliere i^e had heard
what had passed between Palmer and myself.— What was said then ? She said that she
had taken up the broth to Mr. Cook as soon as it had come, and that he had refused to
take it» saying that it would not stay on his stomach. — Did Palmer say anything then ?
Yes. — What ? That I must go and fetch the broth ; that he must have it. — ^What did you
do ? I fetched the broth; I took it into the room; Mr. Painter was there. — Where did
you place it ? I cannot remember whether I gave it to him or whether I gave it to Mr.
Cook ; but I know that I left the two together.

I Lord Campbell. — You left it ? Yes.

Mr. James, — Are you quite sure that this was some of the same luroth whieh had been
sent over, and not made at the Talbot Arms ? It had been brought down stairs , aad pat
on a table, and never moved. — ^You are sure ? Quite sure. — Some time afterward» did
you ^o up 'and find this broth again? Yes. — Where did you find it? lu the chamber
utensil. — You found that it had been vomited ? Yes.

Lord Casipbbll. — ^How long afterwards ? I eannot exactly resMmbev*

Mr. James. — ^About an hour or an hour and a half ? It might be, or it nright be two
konrs, or it might be less. — On that evening about 6- o'ck>ck was any barley-water made
in the hotel for him ? Yes. — ^Did you take it uf* to Cook ? Yes. — ^ When yoa took it tap
was Palmer there or not ? I cannot remember. — However, it was made in the hotel ?
Yes. — ^Did that stay upon his stomach? did he take that? I do not kas^ whether that
did or not ; sometimes it would, and sometimes it would not. — ^Dc^you remember whether
it dsd or not ? I cannot. — Do you remember some arrowroot at ^ o'dodt that eveniiig ?
Saturday ? — Yes. Yes, — Where was that made ? In the kitchen. — ^Did you take it up?
Yes. — Who were there when you took that up? That I camiot remember.-*-Do you
remember whether Palmer was there or not ? I do not. — Was that retained upon bis
stomach or not, do you remember ? I cannot remember*

Lord Campbell. — Did you see it in the chamber utensil ? That I do not know.

Mr. Jicenes. — When was Mr. Bamford called iu? when did you first see him? I
believe on the Saturday ; Saturday I believe was the first time I saw him, about 8 o'dock
in the afternoon ; he might have been there some time in the day before, but 1 do not
know. — On the Sunday morning about what time did you go into Mr. Cook's room ?
Perhaps between 7 and 8. — Had any person slept in tiie same room that night t
Mr, Smith, I believe. — Who is Mr. Smith ? Jerry Smith, a lawyer. — He is called Jerry
Smith, a lawyer ? Yes.

Lord Campbeix. — ^He had slept in his room that night ? Yes.

Mr. Jarfiea. — ^Do you know whether Jerry Smith is a friend of Palmer's or not ; have
you seen him with him ? Yes, I have seen him with him. — Yon went in about eigkt
o'clock ; how did you find Mr. Cook ? what did he ssfy when you went iu on the Sunday
morning ? I asked him if he felt any worse; he said he felt pretty comfortable, and hdta
slept well since twelve o'clock. — ^Upon this Sunday was any more broth brought ot^er ?
Yes. — ^About what quantity should you say ? A Isurge breakfast-cup. — Who brought it U>
the Talbot Arms ? Charles Horley, I believe ; I did not see Mm^ but I heard thai he kadi
brought it. — ^Who is Horley ; do jou know ? I do not exactly know. — However, H was
sot made at the Talbot Arms; of that you are quite sure ? It was not made at the TaUboi:
Arms. — About what o'clock on the Sunday was it brought ? Between twelve and one.

Mr. Serjeant Shee, — -You saw it at that time ? I saw the broth ; I did not see it osKte
into the house.

Mr. James. — ^Did you take any of it up to Mr. Cook's room ? Yes*— In* fbe same cup
in which it was brought? Yes» — ^Was it brought hot, then, ready for drinking? Yes.—
And you toek it up to Cook's bedroom in the same cup m whick it had been brought?
Exactly as it came over, — Did you taste any of that? Yes. — Beflpre you teok it up tuMr.
Cook's room ? Yes, — ^How much do you suppose you drank ? About two tablespoonfuls.
— ^You must describe exactly what the eflfect of that was upon you ; were you sick? Yes.
— ^How soon after you had taken it were you sick ? In about half an boor, or it might be
more ; it was not more than an hour.

Lord Campbell. — Did you vomit ? Yes.

Mr. James. — ^How frequently ? All the afternoon, till about five o'clock. — Violently ?
Violently. — Were you obKged to retire to your bedroom ? Yes. — And go to bed ? — ^Yes.

. Lord CAHPBB]ai.-*Or«i weve obliged to go t<> bed? Yesv

FIRST DAY, Mat 14, 1856. 35

Mr. James. — ^Did yoa T<»nit many times ? A great many times. — Up to that time had
you been quite well ; were you quite well at that time irhcn you took the broth? Yea ; I
felt per&cUy weU during the morning.

Lord CAMFasLL» — ^Had yoa i>ecently had any ailments No. — ^You had no bbu*
sea? No.

Mr. Jame&i~-ii»A. yon taken anything that had disagreed with yon at all ? Not tliat I
am aware of. — Had yon had your usual breakfast ? Tes. — And tbis was between twelve
aod one when yon. tasted this broth as you took it up ? Yes. — ^Before your dinner? Yes.
You took it on an empty stomach, then ; up to what time did you remain ill m your room
from this excessive Yomiting ?

Mr. Baron Alderson. — Till about five o'clock, she says.

Mr. James, — You say you were ill in this way till abont five o'clock ? Yes. — At what
time were you able to go down to your work again ? Before six ; about a quarter before
six.— During the Sunday did you see Mr. Cook several times ? In the evening and in
the morning; I did not see him at all in the afternoon. — ^You were ill in your room; but-
in the eveniog, after you had to some extent recovered, did you see him ? Yes. — How did
he appear during that evening; better? Yes; I did not see that he was any worse.— ^
With the exception of his vomiting this broth and theae thija^ which were taken to kxm,
di'djoa observe anything? He appeared in good spirits.

Lord Camfbsll. — Do you siq»pose that he had any bowel complaJHt? Noy I do not
thmkthathehad.

Mr./ames. — ^Was there an^ discharge firom the bowels, or was it, as £ELr as you
observed, confined to this vomiting ? There might be a little on the Saturday. — ^How
much? About once, perhaps. — ^Then was the illness from which he appeared to be
soffenng fttnn the vomiting after he had taken this broth and these things which were .
sent to him? Yes. — ^What was the latest hour that you saw him on the Sunday night?
It might be abovrt 10 ; it might be after that ; not much after that. — At what time do you
thfflk you saw him on the Monday morning? Between 7 and 8. — ^You went into his
room ? Yes.— You took him up his breakfast ; what did you take him up for break^ist that
morning ? A cup of coffee. — ^Did you see him drink that or not ; do you remember ? No.
1 do not think I remained with him while he drank it. — ^Did he vomit it or not ? He did
not.— Had Palmer been there ? Yes, he was there in the momiDg.-~-About what time in
the morning ? I saw him there about a quarter past 7 ; it might be a quarter or it might
be half past 7 ; I cannot exactly remember the time he was there ; some time ti^
monuig. — ^Did lie see Cook that monung ? I do not know ; I saw Mm coming dovm stairs,
as though he had been to see Mr. Cook. — ^What time did Mr. Cook get up on tibat Monday ?
1 o'clock. — From about a quarter past 7, whea you saw Palmer coming down stalls in the
morniog, did Palmer come again to him till about 10 o'clock that ni^ht; was Palmer there
during the day of Monday ? Not that I am aware of. — ^When did Cook get up on the
Monday ? About 1. — How did he appear when he got up on the Monday ? He sheared
a great deal better. — ^Did he wash and dress himself? Yes, he washed, and dressed, and
shared. — He appeared, as you say, a good deal better ? Yes, he said he felt better, only
exceedingly weak. — ^Did he dress himself entirely ? Yes, just as if he was going out—
D5d any persons come to see him on that Monday ? Yes. — ^Who ? Ashmall the jockey,
«Bd Mr. Ashmall's brotiier and Mr. Saunders. — Saunders was his trainer, I believe ; did
apt others visit him that day that you remember? Not that I am aware of. — ^What food
did he take that day ? I gave him some arrowroot about 1 o'clock, as soon as he got up,
apd some dry toast. — ^Did he retain it on his stomach ?. Yes, that remained. — ^What else
<Ji4 he have dirnng that day, do you remember? I believe a cup of coffee, but I do not
remember about what time ; perhaps about 4 or 5. — You saw him during the afternoon?
Yes.— And <iid he ooa^sue better while he was up ? Yes, be sat up until about 4 o'clock. —
About what time that evening did you i^in see Palmer ? Between 9 and 10. — Did he
go to Cook'S room, or where did he go ? Yes, he sat down in Mr. Oook'^ room. — ^Did you
leave Palmer in Cook's room when you retired to bed that night, do you remember ? I
do not remember. — ^Did you ever see Cook again till you were called in when he was seized
with his attack ? It might be about half-past 10 when I left him, but whether I left
^Ii. Palmer with him I do not remember, and I did not see him again uAtil about a quarter
before 12. — ^Do you remember any pills being brought that Monday night by Mr. Bamford ?
Tes, I remember a box ; I do not know whether it was piUs ; I do not know what it con-
ned, but something was given to me.

Lord CfiMPHBiJ.. — A p&ll-box ? Yes. — At what hour w«a. diat ? About 8.
Mr. Jame^ — ^Who gave you that box ? Miss Bond, the- housekeepex. — ^To take to
Cook's room? To take up stairs to Mr. Cook's room. — Did you take it to Cook's room?

c 2

36 TRUL OF WILLIAM PALMER.

Tes. — ^Where did yoa place that box ? On the dre88uig-table.*-AVlieii you say a box, was-
it a pill-box or not ? Yes, it appeared so to me.

Mr. Babon Aldebsom. — Was it in paper ? Yes, it was wrapped up in white paper.

Mr. James. — You placed that on the dressins-table in Mr. Cook's bedroom ? Yes. —
Had you done that before Palmer came ? I had not seen Mr. Palmer since the morning-.
— Palmer came and went into Cook's room after you had placed those pills or that box
on Cook's dressing-table? Yes. — ^And you left it there ? I left it there.— You saw, yot»
say. Palmer, the prisoner, sitting down ; was he sitting down by the side of Cook's bed,
or where ? He .was sitting down by the fire.

Mr. Babon Aldkbsom. — This was at 8 o'clock, when the pill-box came, and she saw
Cook and Palmer together between 9 and 10 ?

Mr. James, — ^Exactly, my Lord.

Mr. Babon Aldebson. — It is not as if one came immediately after the other?

Mr. James, — No, my Lord; it occurs from a little break in the instruction — it iff
perfectly clear. (7b the Witness) You retired to rest? Yes. — ^About what time?"
between 10 and 11. — Did the waitress, Layinia Barnes, call you up? Yes. — About what
time was it that you were called up? It might be a quarter or ten minutes before 12;
I did not look, but I should fancy from the time when the clock struck that it would ba
that — Did you hear any screaming ? Yes, Tiolent screaming.

Mr. Serjeant Skee. — What did you hear? It is very important to have this regularly.

Mr. James. — What did you first hear when you were called up ?

Mr. Babon Aij>ebson. — What noise? Whilst I was dressing I heard him scream,
violently.

Mr. James, — Did those screams come fi*om Cook's room ? Yes. — More than once ?
Twice. — Is youV room over his ? No. — Where is it in relation to his ? It is not exactly
over his, it is up above. — On another story ? Yes. — And you heard the screams in your
room ? Yes. — Did you go down to his room ? Yes. — Did you enter Cook's room ?
Yes, — ^Describe what you first saw, what he said to you, and what you saw ; what was he
doing ? As soon as I entered the room I found him sitting up in bed ; he desired me
to fetch Mr. Palmer directly. I told him Mr. Palmer was sent for, and walked to his.
bedside.

Mr. Babon Aldebson. — You walked to his bedside? Yes; I foimd the pillow upon
the floor.

Lord Cam PBELi.. — What light was there in the room ? One mould candle burning.

Mr. James, — ^When you got to his bedside, what didyou observe ? I picked up the
pillow and asked him would he lay down his head. — Was he at that time sitting up ?
les.— What was he doing when you went to the bed; what did you observer He
was beating the bedclothes. — In what manner? Like tliis, with his arms and hands
(describmg it).

Lord Caupbeli*.— With both his hands ? With both his hands and arms stretched
out

Mr. «/am«s.— Stretched out ? Like this. — ^Were his arms stretched out ? They were,,
in this form. — I think you said stretched out ? Yes. — Having picked the pillow up^ ypa
asked him to lay his head down ? Yes. — ^What did he do then ? He said, " I cannot lie
down. I shall sufibcate if I lie. Oh, fetch Mr. Palmer I " very loud he called.— Did
you observe his legs at all ? No, not then.^^Did you observe his arms ? His body, hifr
head and neck, were moving then ; a sort of jumping or jerkiug.-*Was his itiead back at.
all ? His head was back ; sometimes he would throw back his head j^pon the p^ow,
and then he would raise himself up again. — Where was this jumping or jerking ; in his
head? AU over his body. — Did you observe any difficulty about his breathing? Yes,i
very bad.— Did you observe anything about his mouth or his eyesj? Yes ; the ball of
the eyes very much projected.

Lord CAMFBEi.L.r-Of both eyes ? Yes.

Mr. James, — ^Did you observe any gasjong when he spoke ? Yes ; it was difficult for
him to speak, he was so short of breath. — Did he scream again while you were in the
room? Yes, three or four times.-<->Was that while he was doing this? Yes; he, was.
moving and knocking about all the time. — Did he give utterance to any words in his
soreaming, or was it a mere convulsive scream, or what was it? He called aloud
" Murder" twice. — ^Afber the beating had gone on with his hands and arms, as you have
described^ did you observe ai»y stiffiiess about his arms or hands ? He asked me to rub
one hand.

FIBST DAY, Mat 14, 1856. 37

Mr. Sajeant 8hee.—l must request my learned friend to aak the vitness what she
observed and not to suggest.

Hr. James, — ^I mnst ask you to object to any question which I put.

Mr. Serjeant Shee, — I object to my learned fHend suggesting any symptom ; let the
witness state the symptoms which she observed : that suggestion was very important.

LK>rd Campbell.-— <' He asked me to rub one of his hands."

Mr. James, — In what state did von find it ? I fi>und it stiff.—Do you remember
which hand it was you rubbed ? The left hand.

Lord Campbell. — Just describe a little more particuhuly what you mean by ''stiff" ?
It appeared to be stretched ofut as though the fingers were somethmg like paralysed. —
Did they move? No, they did not.— Was the hand open or shut? Like this (about
half-shut) ; it seemied to me to be stiff all the way up his arm. — Had your rubbing him any
•effect ? I did not rub him very long ; as soon as he thought I had rubbed it sufficiently
"he thanked me. — Was the stiffness gone ? No, I did not perceive that it was gone.

Mr. James, — ^During the time that he was suffering in this way did Palmer come in ?
Palmer was there in the room when I rubbed his hands. — While this jerking of the body
was going on as you have described, was he conscious ? Yes. — Quite ? I noticed him to
twitch too while I was rubbing his arms ; the arms and the body also.

Lord Campbell. — You observed the body to twitch? Yes; he seemed to twitch
jdtogether. — All over him? Yes.

Mr. James. — While this was going on was he conscious? Yes. — Quite? Perfectly;
he seemed to be knowing all that was going forward. — When Palmer came in did he
j^cognise him or not? Yes. — Did he say anything to Palmer? Yes; he was throwing
himself about the bed, and he says, *'0h J Pabner, I shall die:" or "Ohl Doctor, 1
^halldie."

Lord Cabipbell.— He addressed Palmer when he said '* Oh I Doctor, I shall die " ?
Tes.

Mr. James. — Did Palmer make any reply ? His reply was, " Oh I my lad, you
won't." — Did Palmer leave to fetch something, do you recollect? Yes. — He left the
room f Yes.

Lord Campbell. — Immediately after that? I do not know exactly what he said or
-what he did; he stayed just to look at him or so, and then he went away; he asked me
to stay by the bed-side with him.

Mr. James, — How long was it before Palmer returned ? Very shortly, I should think
-as quick as he possibly could go over. — A few minutes ? Yes, perhaps a few. — During
that time did you continue rubbing his hands? No, I merely stood by the bed-side. —
When Palmer came back did he bring anything with him, or what did he do ? He
1>rought some pills. — Anything else? He gave him something else, but whether he
brought it with him or not I do not know ; he gave him a draught from a wine-glass.-^
And the pills ? First the ]^ills and then the draught. — Did he retmn the pills on his
fitotaaeh f When he gave him the pills he said they were in his throat, they stack fast
in his throat, he could not swallow them.

' 'Xibrd Campbell. — ^Mr. Cook said so? Yes ; Palmer desired me to give him a tea-
xspoonftil of toasl-and*water.

Mt. James, — Did you do so ? Yes. — Did he take the toast^and-water ? Yes ; wBen 1
jgkve It him from the spoon, his body was then jerking and jumping.— Did he swallow
the toast-and-water ? When I gave it him from the spoon, he snapped in that sort of way
-at tlie i^po6n : he like snapped at the spoon, like that (describing it), with his hekd and
neclf, and th'€l spoon was fast between his teeth. — That was while you were in the act of
*potiring tile toast-and-water ? Yes.

Lord Campbell. — ^You say, when you gave him the spoon he snapped at it and got it
"between his teeth ? Yes, and it was difficult to get it away j he seemed to bite it very
liard.

Mr. James, — You say he snapped at it with his head and neck ? Yes, in that sort of
way; when he snapped, of course his head and neok moved forward. — Did he move his
whole bead and neck when he did so ? If this waa the teaspoon, it was in this sort of
way (describing it), — His head went forward, did it ? Yes, as I have described. — ^While
thSd was going on, did the water go down his throat and wash the pills down ? Yes.

Lord Campbell. — He had taken the pills before ? Yes^ but he could not swallow
them, he' said.

Mr. James, — ^What happened then, after the effect of it had been to wash the pillB

V

98 TRIAL OF WILLIAM PALMER.

into hif fitomaeh? Mr. Palmer Imiided lum the drmtf^ theo firom a irine^laas: a

liquid. — Something liquid ? Yes.

Lord Campbell. — Yon say PaUner gave him a draught? Yes; in a wineglass three
parts fully of a dark, thick, heavy-looking nature.

Mr. James, — Did he drink it ? Yes. — ^Did you smell it at all^ He snapped at t3ie
glass just the same as he did at the spoon.

Lord Campbell. — Did it seem to be an involuntary motion when he was snapping ?
Yes ; his body was altogether jerking and moving.

Mr. James. — Did he seem as if he could control himself in it ? Not exactly. — What
haj^ned then ; did he get it down his throat ? Yes, he swallowed it. — What happened
then ? It was vomited up immediately. — Upon that, did Palmer make any remark or
do anything ; into what was it vomited ; into some utensil, I suppose ? Into the chamber<-
ntensil. — ^Who held it ? It was placed upon the bed, and I supported his forehead with
my hand while he vomited. — What did it smell like, the stun he vomited ? Opium, I
should think. — Did Palmer say anything, or do anything, as to the pills ? He hoped the
pills were not returned ; I do not know whether he said he hoped the pills had stayed, or
ne hoped they had not returned ; and he searched for the pills. — ^With what ? With a
quill off the dressing-table. — In the utensil? Yes.— ^Did he find the pills? He said, *' I
cannot find the pills," and he desired me to take it away and to pour it carefully, and see
if I could find &e pills or see the pills ; I did so, bnt I could not see the pills at all. —
What happened then ; did you take away the contents of the ntenal ? Yes ; I took away
the contents and came back to tiM room.

Lord Campbell. — ^Yon brought it back ? Yes.

Mr. James, — ^Yon emptied the contents of the utensil I snppose, and brought it back?
Yes. — ^Did he get better ? Yes, he seemed to be more easy. — How long did this second
attack last from the time you went into the room, the beating of the bed-clothes and sa
on, to the time he got more easy ; how long do yon think he was sufferrng in that way?
I should think half-an-hour, or it might be more. — ^Then he got more composed ? Yes. —
Daring the whole of that time I think yon say he was quite conscious ? Yes, he appeared
to be oonseioBS ; he seemed to be knowing all that was going ftirward. — ^Do yon recollect
his asking Palmer anything about his heart ; to feel his heart ? Yes. — ^Was that afler he
got more composed ? He seemed to be a great deal quieter then, and lying down. — ^Did
he say anything to Palmer then about his heart ? He desiiwd him to eeme and either to
feel his heart how it beat, or something of that kind ? — ^What did Palmer do ? He went
to his bed-side, and I do not know whether he placed his hand to his heart, or the side
of his face, I cannot recollect which. — ^Dld he make some observation? Yes, some slight
one; that it was all right, or something of that kind It was quite a slight remark. —
What time did you leave him that morning ; I have got to the morning now ; what time
did you leave him ? About 3 o'clock. — ^Was he asleep when you left him ? No. — ^Did
you leave Palmer in the room with him ? Yes ; Mr. Cook was dozing when I left him ;
he appeared to be asleep, but he was not so, as I learnt the next morning.

Mr. AUorney-General, — Who do you mean, PaUner or Cook? Cook; he vas not
asleep, he told me the next morning he heard me go ooL

Mr. James. — ^Wh^re did you leave Palmer ? In the easy chair. — Was Palmer asleep
or not ? I believe so. — ^Asleep in the easy chair ? Yes. — Yon left abont 3 o'clock yod
say, and went to rest ? I retired to the next room just to lie down ; I did not ^ any
further than the next number, close to his door. — ^Abont what time on Tuesday morning
did you see Cook again ? Six o'clock, T think. — ^Did he describe his feelings to you at
that time how he was? I said, **Has Mr. Palmer gone?'* he said "Yes; he left about
a quarter before 5." I asked him how he felt and wh^her he had been any worse; he
said. No, he had been no worse since I left him in the morning. I said, ^ Yon were asleep
when I went down ?" he said, ** No, I heard you go," — ^Did he say anything of his sufferings
the previous night? He asked me if I had ever seen any one suffer, or any one in such
agony as he was last night ; I said, No, I never had. — Did be describe any more what it
was ? He said he should think I would not wish to see any one ever like that again ? —
Did he say how it happened, or what caused it? I asked him ; I said, "What do yoa
think waS' the cause of all that, Mr. Cook ?" and he said, " The pills that Palmer
gave me at half-past 10." — • What more was said, do yon remember ? I do not
think anything more was said. — During that day how was he ? I asked him then,,
would he have a cup of coffee, or if he would take aoything ; he said, No» not then. —
Was Palmer with him again on that Tuesday ? I do not remember seeing him that
Tuesday morning till he was sent for. I did meet him on the stairs that morning, bnt I
did not see him in the room. — On that miKning when you saw him, on the Tuesday, did

FIRST DAT, Mat 14« 1850. S9

yon observe any of those Jerkiact or coftTititiMB abMt him t Ve^ lie MCMed qoHe

composed and qmeft. — Did he thiak of gettbg up that monisiig ? I noticed at the

time the eyes looked very wild.-^Did yoa obaenre any of thatMtiBg -or conmlaioiiP

No; his body seemed to be quite quiet, these ims nothing moving about the body, hot

the ejrea looked veiy wild. — ^You say you did not obMrve any of ithat jerking or

twitching ? No ; he appeared as if he wanted to lettle down and be qmeL — About 12

o'dook was any piimration made to shave him ; did vou send finr a barber 2 No. — What

was done at 12 ? About 12 o'elock he rang his bell and desircd me to send the Boote

over to ask Palmer whether he BUght have a cap of coffee. — ^Did Palmer come? The

Boots returned aud «aid be might have a cup* of coffee ; Mr. Palmer would be over

immediately. — ^Did you take the coffee up ? Yes. — ^About what time was it you took the

coffee up? A little after 12. — When you took it up I think you said Palmer was in Mr.

Cook's room ? Yes. — Where did you put the coffSee, do you remember ? I gave it to

Mr. Palmer. — Shortly afterwards did Palmer say anything to you about the coffee ? Mr.

Psdmer tasted the coffee. — In your presence ? Yes, to see whether it would be too strong :

I gave it into his hands, and he tasted the coffee to see whether it would be too strong for

Mr. Cook. — ^And you left it in his hands? I left it in his hands. — And left the room?

Yes. — Shortly afterwards did you hear anything from Palmer of this coffee ; did you see

whether the coffee had been vomited or not ? I do not know whether it was then or

whether it was after 4 o'clock. — At what time did Mr. Jones arrive on that day ? By

the 3 o'clock train, I believe, in the afternoon.

Lord Campbeli^ — ^From Lutterworth ? Yes.

Mr. James. — Did Mr. Jones go and see Mr. Cook upon his arrival in his room ?
When first I saw Mr. Jones I found him in Mr. Cook's room. — ^After that you took him
up some coffee again ? Yes.

Lord Cahfbeu^ — ^When ? It might be about 4, or it might be between 4 and 5.>-<
Another cup of coffee ? Yes.

Mr. James, — After you had given him that quantity of coffee abeot 4 o'clock did yn«
see Palmer ? Yes.

^ Lord Camfbeul. — Who gave him that ooffee ? I cannot remember^— 4)id you lea^e
it in the room ? Yes, I did ; but whether Mr. Palmer was there I cannot remember noKir.

Mr. /ames.-^— After you had taken up this coffee did you see Palmer ? Did he say
anything to you ? Yes. — ^What did he say to you ? He opened the door and asked me
to empty it out ; that Mr. Cook had vomited tne coffee. .

Lord Campbeli.. — Did he call you in ? He gave it me at the door ; he did not call
me in at all. — You were passing the door ? Yes. — ^How long after ? I do not think it
oonld be an hour.

Mr. Jomes, — ^Was Palmer there when you took that coffee np and left it in the voom?
I cannot remember.

Lord Campboju — ^What did he .give you? He gave me the «ame «teDflil,.aDd said,
that Cook had vomited the coffee. — Was the ooffee in this utensil ? Yes.

Mr. James* — During that evening did you see Cook several times before yon retired
to rest ? Yes. — >How was he .|oing <m. during that evening when you saw him ? He-
appeared to be in very good^irits ; he was talking about getting up the next momiqg..
— J^id he say anything about being shaved the next morning ? Yes, he did ; he said that
Jye would have the barber sent for. — Did you also give him some arrowroot that evening?
I believe I did. — ^At what time did you see him last that evening? When was the last .
moment you saw him ? It was not later than half-past 10. — Was Palmer with him when
you left him ? Yes.

XiOrd Campbeix. — He was in bis bedroom ? Yes ; I gave him a jug of toast and
vf ater at the door.

Mr. James, — You gave that to Palmer for Cook ? Yes ; Mr. Palmer ssdd to Mr. Cook,
*' Can this good girl do anything more for you to-night? " Mr. Cook said, '* No ; I shall
want nothing more. Good night." — ^That was as late as half -past 10 ? Was that said by
Mr. Cook in a composed and comfortable manner ? Yes. — I believe you did not go to
lied that night ? No. — ^Where did you remain ? In the kitchen. — ^You were anxious
probably to see how Mr. Cook went on ? Yes, 1 was. — While you were in the kitchen
was the beU of Mr, Cook's room rung ? Yes. — Violently ? Violently.

Lord Campbell. — Were you asleep at that time ? No.

Mr. James. — ^About what time ? A little before twelve ; ten minutes perhaps before
twelve. — It was as nearly as possible the ^me time as on the previous night? Yes, it was.
•—Mr. Jones was sleeping in his bedroom? Yes. — It was a double-bedded room? Tfa*^

40 TRIAL OF WILLIAM PALMER.

▼as a bed mad* up for Mr. Jones.^-Did you go up stain to Mr. Cook's room on hearing
the bell? Yes. — In what state did you find Mr. Cook? I belieTe he was sitting up in
bed; Mr. Jones appeared to be supporting him; I think he had his arm round his
shoulder. Mr. Cook said, '* Oh, Mary, fetch Mr. Palmer directly." — Cook iras consdous,
then? Yes. — ^He spoke to you and knew yon? Yes. — ^What did you do? I went over
for Mr. Palmer ; I rang the bell, the surgery-bell, at the surgery-door ; Palmer came to
the bedroom window. — How soon did Palmer come to the bedroom window after you rang
the bell ? As soon as I stepped off the step into the middle of the road ; I expected him
to come to the window, and as soon as I stepped off into the road he was there ; he did
not put up the sash. — ^You observed him at the window ; you say he did not put up the
sash of the window ? No.-rWas there a light in bis bedroom, did you observe ? I could
not discover one. — How could you see then ; was it dark, or was there gas, or wbat ? I
could not positively see him ; I could hear him ; I could not discern him ; he merely
opened a small casement of glass on one side. — And spoke to you ? Yes. — Could you at
that time see whether he was dressed or not ? I could not.

Lord Campbeix. — Could not you see him at all ? No, I could not ; I heard him.

Mr. James, — ^You heard his voice ? Yes. — You knew his voice ? Yes. — What did you
say to him ? I asked him to come over to Mr. Cook directly ; that he was much the same
as he was the night before. — ^What did Palmer say ? I do not remember what answer he

give me ; I turned round and went across again. — You went back to the hotel ? Yes. —
ow soon after did Palmer come ? Two or three minutes. — ^Were you in the bedroom
when Palmer came ? Yes. — When Palmer came in did he make any observation about
dressing ? He never dressed so quick in his life, I think he said.

Lord Campbell. — ^When he entered Cook's room? Yes. — ^Was that the first thing he
said ? That was the first thing he said.

Mr. James. — When you went into the room, in what state was Mr. Cook ; was Mr.
Jones still with him? Yes, he was. — ^Was he sitting up in the bed ? Yes, much the same
«8 he was when I left.

" Mr. Serjeant Shee, — ^I must ask my learned friend again not to suggest ; he is suggesting :
** Was he sitting up in the bed ?" The moment before he asked, ** Did he say anything
about his dress r ' There is a suggestion every instant.

Lord Campbell. — It seems to me that the examination is conducted with perfect fair-
ness. Nothing has been put in the shape of a leading question about anything which has
been hitherto doubtful.

Mr. James, — ^You said that you left the room and Cook was sitting up, and Jones, I
think you said, supporting him, when I was interrupted ; was that so ? I believe he was.
— ^Where did you remain when you left the room ? After Mr. Palmer came ? — Yes. In
the landing just outside the door. — ^Did you wait there ? Yes. — ^Aiter you had been wait-
ing there some short time, did Palmer come out? I believe he did; yes.

Lord Campbell. — About how long ? A minute or two, very shortly.

Mr. James, — Did you speak to him ? Yes. — ^What did you say to him when Palmer
came out from Cook's room ? I said, " He is much the same as he was last night, Mr.
Palmer." — Did Palmed make you any reply ? He said, " Oh, he is not so ill by the fiftieth
part" — ^Anything else? No; he was then going down stairs as though he was going
into his own house. — Did he return ? Yes. — How long do you think Pidmer was absent,
fh)m his leaving you on the landing until his return to Cook's room ? I do not remem-
ber ; a very short time. — Did he come back to Cook's room ? Yes.

Lord Campbell. — ^That was after his going down stairs ; did he go down ; did he
leave the house ? Yes, he left the house.

Mr. James.— He went down and returned in a very short time to Cook's room ? Yes.
— ^Did you go into the room after Palmer had returned ? I believe I did. — ^Did you hear
Mr. Cook make any request about being turned over ? I believe 1 did ; yes.-^What
did he say ? I believe it was ** Turn me over on my right side ;" I believe it was ** my
right side." — To whom did he say that ; who was in attendance upon him at that time ?
I was not in the room at that time ; I was at the door. — You think you heard it through
the door ? I think I heard it through the door ; the door was open, and I was at the
door. — Then you went in ? No, I did not, — Did you go in ? No. — Were you in the
room when he died? I do not think I was. — Not at the moment of his death ? Not at
the moment he departed.^-Did you go into the room immediately after his death ? I
went in, I believe, just before he died, but I came out again ; I was not in, I believe,
when he departed. — Did ^ou see Mr. Jones in attendance upon him a few minutes before
he died ? Yes. — What did you see being done when Mr. Jones was in attendance upon

FIRST DAT, yUr U, 1856. 41

liim ; what iras he dnisg? He was sopporting him I thiiric. I believe tiie laat time I
saw him he had his right arm imder Mr. Cook's head. — Will yoa desoribe all you saw ?
Mr. Palmer was then feeling Mr. Cook's pnlse, and he said to Mr. Jones '* His pulie is
gone." Mr. Jones pressed the side of his face to ^r. Cook's heart. Mr. Jones lifted np
Bis hands in that way (deacribmg it), but never q>oke. — ^Did yoa understand from that that
he was dead ? Mr. Palmer asked me to fetch Mr. fiamford, and I went over for Mr«
Bamford. — ^From the time that you were called up this night at about 10 minutes before
12, till his death which you haye just described, how long do you think elt^sed &om the
time when he was first sei2^ ? It might be three-quarters of an hour.

Mr. Baron Alderson. — ^He died before I o'clock ? Yes.

Mr. James. — ^Did you leave the room after the death ? When I went to fetch Mr.
Bamford I did not go into the rcx>m again ; Mr. Bamford came over, and I saw him when
lie came down stairs, and he said, " He is dead ; he was dead when I arrived." — After you
liad fetched Mr. Bamford, did you go up stsurs upon the landing again and remain upon'
the stairs ? When Mr. Bamford came oat and told me that Mr. Cook was dead, I went
on to the landing and sat down upon some stairs ; I sat there about ten minutes, and Mr.
Jones came out of the room and looked at me and said, " Mr. Palmer wants you," or,
'' Wiii you go into that room ? " or something of that sort ; I do not know exactly the
words. — The room that had been Cook's, where be bad died? Yes ; it was in a low voice,
so that I could not catch some of the words. — Did you go into the room where Mr. Cook
was lying dead ? Yes. — ^Waa Palmer there ? Yes. — ^Was any one with Palmer ? No.—
When you went into the room did Palmer speak to you? Yes ; I said; '* It is not possible
that Mr. Cook is dead."— What did Palmer say ? He said, ** Oh ! yes, he is dead."— Did
he go on to speak to you ? Nothing more then, not that minute ; he asked me who I
thought would come to lay him out ; I mentioned two women that I thought Mr. Palmer
knew; he said, " Those are just the women ; " I said, "Shall I fetch them ? " he said,
" Yes." — Had you seen in Mr. Cook's room during the time he was there a book? Yes.
— Will you describe what sort of a book it was ? A dark book, with a gold band round
the edge. — ^About what sized book was it ? Not a very large one, with a clasp at one
end : it was not exactly a square one ; rather more long. — ^Haa you seen him in possession
of it when he had stopped at the Talbot Arms before ? Yes.— On his way to the Liver-
pool races ? Yes. — ^The same book ? The same book. — I think you said it was rather
more long, with a gold border or band ? Yes. — ^And a clasp at one end ? Yes. — Did you
observe any pencil ; did you see the head of any pencil ? Yes.

Mr. Babon Axderson. — ^A pencil going into it ? Yes, a case on one side to admit a
penciL

Mr. James, — How long before had it been that he had stopped at the Talbot Arms, on
his way to the Liverpool races, when you had seen that book? I cannot say; two or
tiiree months before; — ^How shortly before he died had you seea that book in ^Cook's
room ? On the Monday nieht— -Where had yoa seen that book? I gave it him from
the dressing-table to his bed^Was that before his attack ou the Monday night or after?
Before ^ I took it from the looking-slass ; he asked me to give him that book off the
looking-glass. — ^For what purpose dia he want it ? He asked me to give him the book
and a pitm and ink and some paper, that he was going to write, and I gave them all
to him.

Lord Camfbeli..-— Yoa gave him the book in bed ? Yes ; I handed them all to him
iabed.

Mr, James. — About what time in the evening would that be ? Between seven and
eight on the Monday night. — ^That was, of course, before his attack ? Yes. — After he
had written or copied, or whatever he had done with it, what did you do with the book?
H/B took from the book a postage-stamp. — Did you observe whether there was any case
or pocjtet in the book ? At one end there was, where he took the stamp from. — ^What
did you cIo with the book after he had taken the stamp from it? I placed it back on the
looking-glass on the dressing-table. — That was about eight o'clock ? Between seven
mi eignt. — Did you place it outside, or in a drawer ? Outside.

Mr. Babon Ajldebson. — On the frame of the looking-glass.

Jtfr. Jcmes. — Was that at his request ? Yes. — ^I think y^u stated that after that time
"Palilier went to his room on that night ; Palmer was there ? Yes. — Did you ever see that
book after that time ? Not to my knowledge. — Have you searched the room ; did you
search the room for it when Cook had died, when it was pointed out to your attention?
Not the night he died. — But afterwards did you make search for it ? Yes ; the first
-dme I was requested to do so I did. — You searched everywhere you could to .find it ?
Yes.— When you went itito the room where Cook's body was lying, and Palmer — ^

42 TRIAL OP WILLUK PALUER.

there, did ym ebeetve the ^kitfaes irhidi Oaok had vom ; iFhere were liiey placed ?
Ob a elwir, i Mieve, noieiirikere. — ^Did yon see Pahner do anything with fate cMhes ?
i saw him sesrching the pockets of the cost.

Jjotd. Campiibll. — When did yon see him do that? On the Tuesday night, af^er
Gook^s deBiMi, at the time when Mr. Jones wi^ed me to go into the room. — How soon after
his de«th P Ahoot ten mhmtes.

Mr. /ornes.— That was at Ihe thne when Jones toldyoa to ffo into his room ? Yes. —
You went in ? Yes 5 I found Mr. Palmer with the coat in his hands. — That was a few
minutes after Cook's death ? About 10 minutes.

Lord Campbell. — ^The coat which had belonged to Cook? Yes, the coat which I had
seen Mr. Cook wear.

Mr. James* — ^What was he doing with the coat ? Searching the pockets. — ^What sort
of coat was it ; a dress coat ? No 5 it was not a frock coat, nor yet a dress coat, nor yet a
great coat; I cannot tell the name of the coat. — Did you observe him do anything
with the pillow where Cook lay? Yes, he searched under the pillow and bolster.

Lord Campbell. — Who did? Mr. Palmer.

Mr. James.—Did you observe any letters anywhere in the room ? I saw two or three^
I think, lie upon Ihe chhnney-piece. — Was that at this time immediately after Cook's
death, and while Palmer was in the room ? Yes. — ^Did you ever see them afterwards.?
No ; I did not go into the room much afterwards. — Had you seen those letters on the
mantelpiece before his death'? Not to my knowledge. — Aifter his death yon saw tiuem
while Palmer was in the room ? Yes. — You have itever seen them since ? Not thai I am
aware of.

Adjofumed to to-morrow at\Q 0* clock,

[At the close of the proceedings this day, the jary were taken to the London Coffee-
house, where they dept in a fifte«i->bedded room, under the charge of Mr. Haiker, Mr.
Mackay, and Mr. Toms.]

SECOND DAY'S TRIAL.

Mat 15, 1856.

ELIZABETH MILLS recalled.— Cross-examined by Mr. Serjeant 8hee,

How loi^ had yom been tft the Talbot Arms at the date of the death of Mr. Cook ?
Ahodt thnee yesnu — ^How long belfore Mr. Ooc^'e death did you see him there first? I
cannot exactly Tenemher the £rst tiaie he casie, but I know he was there for three or
Ibvr rnoBths ; he made it his home. — Do you mean immedaatdy pvemus to his deathf
T«8; perhaya in May waa the finst of his ooning there ; pei^aps he was absent a laondi
9r two. — Tbe May of 18S5 ? The same year that he titied. — Then I suppose you mean,
he was there off and on somewhere about lihree months altogether ; is that so ? Yes. —
Was he occasionally ailiiig during this time ? I never heard him oomplasa of anythin|^
except his throat. — About when did you first hear, him complain of his throat ; how long
hefore his death ? Peihaps two or three months before his dealh. — Did he at that time
complain frequently ? No, sir — ^merely of a sore throat, or something of that kind»
through cold. — Do you know if be took any medicine' for it ? A gargle, I believe, he had.
— 'You mean, I suppose, a gargle for some considerable time — several bottles of gargle for
hifi throat ? I saw but one. — Do you know who attended him for that throat, if anybody ?
I believe he had a gaigle from Mr. Thirlby. — ^Did you observe from that early time,
wh^i he first came to Sie Talbot Airms, any soreness about his mouth ? No.—Bid yoa
at any time previously to his death observe soreness about his mouth ? None at all.— •
Did he at any time ai^ear to have a difficulty in swallowing ? No, sir, I never heard
him complain. — Did you know €>f his tongue having been sore ? No, sir. — You never,
heard him complain of that? I have seen him with a loaded tongue, I believe, about
once or so. — ^You mean a firai tongue ? Yes. — \ am not speaking of 1*iat : did he ever
complain in year heanag of the tongue being sore, so as to render it difficult for him to
swallow ? No, »r, not to my knowledge. — 'Yon do not know thenof caoslac having been
ap^ied to it while he was there ? No.— Do you know if Mr.. Thirlby attended hun lor
his mouth and tiureat at the imi ? I do not know. — How recently before his death did
you hear him complain of the sore throat ? I cannot remember, — ^Tell me about, if you
can; was it within a fortnight? Longer than that. — Three weeks? It might be a
month, if not more. — Did he ever tell yom it was aetuaUy sore— the skin wafio#-^that

SBOOND MT, JfAT l€s IBM. 4S

it was sore IB thttt fitfue ? No; it «asMre,h« faMedtUiio«ghft«li||^todUllie Imd^

Did iie ever tell yon it had healed? Ko. — Did he besid^ the gargle take nediciDe

irhDe he was at the hoose ? Not that I am aware of. — ^Do you mean to say you ne^er

saw pill-boxes about? Only while he was ill. — I mean before his last iiloess? No, I

Devar did. — Had he a cough ? No, not particularly. — ^He had a oough, had he ? A

slight congh, not a yiolent cough ; a cough a person would haye through C4)ld, not a

frequent, violent cough. — Barely, I sappose, without one, though not a violent one ? I

did not say he was rarelv without one. — ^What do you say about it ? I say he had a

slight one at the time his throat was sore ; it would be through cold perhaps. — Just before

he w«nt to Shrewsbury had he been at all ailing ? Not to my knowledge. — When he

came back from Shrewsbury he at once said he was ailing, did he not ? That he waa

poorly.— How long did you stay at the Talbot Inn after he died ? Till the day after

Christmas-day. — ^Where did you ^o to then ? Home. — ^Where is home ? In the Potteries^

ShdtoiL-^Have you been in service since ? Yes. — ^Where ? Dolly's Hotel. — Is tliat in

London ? Yes, Patemoster-row. — When did you go into service in Dolly's Hotel ? In

January.— Are you in service there now ? Na — ^How long did you remain there ? Till

February; I stayed six weeks there. — Dolly's is a ch(^*hou8e close by ? Yes. — In what

capacity were you there ? Chambermaid. — ^Did you after you came to Ijondon see Mr.

S^ihens ? Yes. — ^Ho w soon after you came to London ? Perlu^ about a week. — Where did

yon see Mr. Stephens ? At Dolly's Hotel. — ^Was it more than once ? More than once oc

tince.— -How xnaoy times ? I do not exactly know. — Endeavour to tell me ? Perhaps four

or five times. — ^Will you swear it was not ten times ? It might be. — Was it twenty times P

Not that I am aware of. — Will you swear it was not twenty times ? I will. — ^Will you swear

it was not more than twelve? It might be six or seven ; that was about the outside. —

Will you swear it was not twelve, and not more than six or seven ? I cannot exactly

keep account — ^Where did you see him, in the coffee-room or in a private room ? Some*

times he would speak to me while Mrs. Dewhnrst was there, in one of her sitting-rooaosL

—Then you -went into a sitting-room and spoke to him alone ? Not at all times. — But

frequently alone ? Perhaps twice or three times. — ^Who was there besides ? Sometimea

Hrs. Dewhnrst, sometimes Miss Dewhurst. — I presume that is the landlady of the inn?

Yes.~-Was it always about Mr. Cook'a death he spoke to you ? No, it was not. — ^What

e]se had he to speak to you about? He would mei^j call to see how I liked London, and

whether I was well in health, and all that. — ^Mr. Stephens is a man not in your station, he

u a gentleman.; do you mean to say he called to see how you liked London ? Just to see

irhe&er I liked the place. — ^He called six times on you to see whether yon liked the place z

do you mean to teU that to the jury on your oath : do you persist in that ? Yes. — That he

^sailed six times to see how you liked the place, is that what you say ? I am not going to take

lay oath : he always called on me to ask me how I liked London. — ^What didite call about ?

Sometimes one thing, sometimes another. — ^What besides Mr. Cook's death ? Nothing be*

sides that. — ^Had you conversed with him much at the Talbot Inn when he was there jait

before the funeral ? Some little. — Had yon had any private oonversation with him ? No.—*

Bad you never been in a room with him alone at the Talbot Inn ? No. — ^Had he spok^i

to you about coming to L>ondon ? No. — ^Now, when he came to Doily's Hotel he ^>oke to

you about Mr. Cook's death and nothing else ; is that so? On your oath did he speak to

Tpu about anything else ? Yes, many more things. — ^What else ? I cannot remember. —

Tell me a single thing of sufficient importance to have remsuned in your memory that he

^ke to you about except Mr. Cook's death ? I do not remember : I do not keep such

things in my head for weeks or months together. — Did you not tell him after he had

been calling two or three times, " Why, Mr. Stephens, you have been here often enough;

1 have told you all I know " ? No, I did not. — ^Did he give you money during the tune

you were there ? Never. — ^Never ? Never a farthing. — Has he made ^u any promises?

No, — ^Not even to get you a place ? Not at all, — ^When did you see him last? Yester*

day. — Where ? In court. — ^Is he in court now ? Not that I am aware of. — ^When did

you see him last out of court ? I saw him last Tuesday at Dolly's Hotel. — Was it still

«hout Mr. Cook's death he was speaking to you ? — He merely said, " How do you do? '*

and asked me how I was; plenty more were present. — Did he dine at Dolly's? No. —

Does he live there ? He taay do, for what I know. — Do you mean to swear that ? I do

iw)t know where he lives. — Where was it at Dolly's you saw him last Tuesday ? In one

of the rooms. — In the parlour? In a sitting-room. — Were you alone with him? No. —

7^0 was there ? Lavihia Barnes,— Lavinia Barnes of the Talbot inn ? Yes. — Was she

in place at Dolly's too ? She is staying at Dolly's now.—Then Mr. Stephens had an

interview with you and Lavinia Barnes ?

The Attorney-General — I beg your pardon, she has not said so; do not put an am*
biguous phrase into the witness's mouth which she has not said, j

44 TKIAL OF WILLIAM PALMER.

Lord Cakpbell. — If yoa repeat what the says yoa miist repeat it correctly.

Mr. Serjeant Shee, — ^What am I to call it bat an interwiew ? Was there a meeting
between him and you and Layinia Barnes in the same room ? There were two more

fentlemen in the room besides ns three. — Who ? Mr. Hattou and Mr. Gardner. — Is Mr.
[atton the chief officer of police in Staffordshire, at Bageley and the neighbourhood. I
suppose he is.— You knew him when you were there, did you not? Yes. — Is Mr.
Gardner an attorney at Rngeley ? I believe so. — On this occasion was all the talk about
Mr. Cook's death ? I cannot remember ; it might be mentioned. — ^Do you mean to say
there was no word said about anything else ? Yes, I dare say there was. — ^Will you
swear there was a single subject of conversation mentioned ? I do not pretend to keep in
my head what the conversation was. — Will you undertake to say there was a single sub-
ject of conversation mooted between you and Lavinia Barnes and those gentlemen except
the subject of Cook's death ? Will i undertake to say it, do you say ? — ^Yes. There
were many more things talked about. — ^What ? That I do not wish to mention. — You must
mention what was the subject of conversation ? I cannot remember ; it will be impossible
for me to remember. — Do you mean to undertake to swear these gentlemen did talk to
you on other subjects besides the death of Mr. Cook ? They were not talking witli me
alone, but among themselves; I was not paying attention to what they were talking
about. — You and Lavinia Barnes were in the room ? Yes ; perhaps my thoughts were
occupied about something else ; I was not paying attention to them. — ^Were there any
other subjects talked about that now remain in your memory, and that you can speak to?
I cannot remember. — And you cannot remember any other matter of conversation? I
cannot. — ^They did talk about Mr, Cook's death ? They might, but 1 cannot remember.
— ^Did they tjdk about the trial that was coming on ? That I do not know. — Did they
talk about the evidence that you were to give ? No ; not that I heard. — ^Did they ai
you what you could prove ? No. — Did they read your depositions over to you, taken
before the coroner ? No, they did not. — Did they read anything else to you ? I saw
nothing produced. — Was anything read to you ? No. — ^Was anything read to you from a
newspaper ? No. — ^Did Mr. Stephens in any previous interview read to you anything
from a newspaper ? No. — ^Did he ever read your depositions to you ? No. — Did he
ever talk to you about the symptoms which Mr. Cook exhibited shortly before his death ?
He did not. — Do you know Mr. Dean? I do not. — You do not know a Mr. Dean ? No.
— ^Was that the first time since Mr. Cook's death you had seen Mr. Hatton? No; I had
seen him before. — How many times? I cannot remember. — Half-a-dozen times? I
fihould not think more than twice. — Will you swear not more than twice; will yon
gwear not half-a-dozen times ? I am sure not half-a-dozen times. — Where did you see
him before ? I saw him once at Dolly's. — ^Was that about Mr. Cook's death ? No, it
was not. — ^What was it about ? I believe he dined there, and I merely saw him. — ^Did
you Bee him in the coffee-room ? I saw him in a sitting-room. — Did you wait upon him?
No, I did not. — Were you alone in the room with him ? No. — ^Do you mean to say he
'W98 talking to yon about Mr. Cook's death ? Not that I can remember. — ^Did he speak
at all about Mr. Cook's death to you ? He might, but I cannot remember. — Did he ?
I cannot remember, I tell yon. — Do not tell me you cannot remember : what did he
«peak to you about? did he, upon your oath, speak to you about Mr. Cook's death ? I
cannot remember. — What do you think ? I do not pretend to tell you what I think.—
Do you mean to say you cannot tell us whether he spoke to you about Mr. Cook's death?
fie might do.— Did he ? I do not know. — ^Do not you believe he did ? I say I cannot
remember. — Do not you believe he did? I do not know whether he did or not: he
might.— Did he not ? I say I do not know. — Do you recollect anything else he said ?
He asked me how I was, I remember. — Did he say a good deal more to you besides that ?
He might—^Did he not ? I do not know. — Had you seen Mr. Gardner before since Mr,
Cook's death? Yes.—How often ? Three or four times.— Where ? Once at Dolly's.—
In what other places, and when? I have met him in the street — Spoken to him?
Merely said, " How do you do," or " Good morning." — Is that once, or more ? Twice,
—Have you met him anywhere else besides Dolly's and the street? Not that I am aware
of. — That is a thing you can answer positively ? Then I say no.^-You mean positively to
aay you have not seen him anywhere else except at Dolly's and in the street ? No. — >Yon.
have not been to any attorney's office with him ? No. — Had you any talk with him in
the street besides "How do you do"? No. — You left Dolly's, in February? Yea. —
Have you been in London since before you came up for this trial ? No.

Lord Campbell. — ^After you left Dolly's, you went back to your home ? Yes.

Mr. Serjeant Shee, — Where are you living now when you are at home ? With my
mother. — -Where is that ? In Rugeley she is now. — How long have you been livixig at
Bugeley with your mother? About three weeks. — ^Where were you uving before that ?

SECOND DAT, Mat 15, 1856. 45

Among my friends. — Was that at Hitchingley ? Tes. — ^Who are yoor friends ? I have
some friends there. — Who are they ? Friends are friends, I suppose. — I do not mean to
ask yoa any rude questions, but that is hardly an answer to me ; with whom hare you
been living? With some friends there; among my friends.-— 'With whom ? I say I hai^
been Hying with my friends. — ^Do you know a man of the name of Dutton ? I do. — ^What
is Dutton ? He is a friend of mine. — It is with him you have been liviug? I have been
living with two. — ^We will take one at a time, if you please. Have yon been livinff at
Dntton's ? I have been staying there a short time.— What is Mr. Dutton? A friend of
Txunes — Is there a Mrs. Dutton ? Yes, his mother. — Have you been living with Mr.
Dutton ? Yes. — As a friend ? I have been staying there. — How long ? About a month.
~*What aged man is Dutton ? About thirty, perhaps. — A labouring man? Yes.— >His
mother lives in the house ? Yes. — ^How long have you known him? About two years*
-^What sort of a house is it ? A cottage. — How many rooms has it ? Two down and
two up. — ^Two bed-rooms ? Yes. — His mother sleeps in one ? Yes. — Where did you
sleep? With her. — ^Always? Yes. — ^Willyon swear that? Yes. — How long had you
known the mother ? Ever since I had known him. — ^Two years ? Yes. — ^Is his mother
dependent on him? No. — What is his mother? I believe she has 6s. a-week coming in.
— ^What has he coming in? That I do not know. — ^You know about? I do not. — Is he
there now as far as you know ? For anything I know he is. — ^Who are your other friends
there ? I do not know I have any more there. — You said you had been staying with
another friend? 1 was staying with a cousin awhile. — Who is that? She is in the
Potteries. — ^Is that the friend you alluded to when you spoke of two ? I spoke of his
brother being there, another single brother. — ^What did you leave Dolly's for ? I did
not like the place. — Did you leave of your own accord? Yes. — ^You can read, I suppose ?
Yes. — Easily ? Yes. — You can read newspapers ? Yes. — Have you read the case of
a Mrs. I>ove ? I do not remember ; I may have done so. — A ease, that lately occurred at
Leeds, of a lady who was said to have been poisoned by her husband? I did not read it ;.
I heard it spoken of. — ^By whom ? By many. — ^By whom ? I cannot mention one more
than another. — By Mr. Stephens? No. — Will you swear that? I will. — Did you never
hear him mention it? No.— Did Mr. Gardner? No.— Did Mr. Hatton? No.— Will
you swear that ? Not one belonging to this trial. — Were you told when you heard of it
what the symptoms of Mrs. Dove were ? I think not ; I merely heard there had been
strychnine used at Leeds; another strychnine case. — Do you mean to say you never
heard the symptoms stated to you ? I did not. — Were the symptoms of strychnine ever

tell you, as I have the deposition before me, that you did not.

The Attomet/'General. — Do not say that, because I shall show how these depositions
were taken.

Mr. Serjeant 8hee,^—l intend to put them in. — When will you swear you first used the
word ** twitching," which yoi^used so frequently yesterday ?" I cannot remember when
first I used the word. — ^Did y^u ever use it berore you came to London ? Yes ; but I
do not know to whom.-^WiU you swear you ever used it before you came to London?
Yes^-^-How can yoa swear it, when you do not know to whom ? I believe I used it in
mother's house. — ^Will you swear you have? Yes; and described the symptomi^the
yoimg'man died under. — ^Will you swear you used the word ;* twitching " ? Yes; at
mother's.-— Is your mother here ? No ; she is not— When will you swear you first used
the word ^jerking'' to anybody ? I cannot remember that. — Has it ever been used to
your by anybody ? Not that I am aware of.— Will yon undertake to swear it has not ?
It lias not<^^-<Have you ever been asked by anybody if theare were not **^ jerkings" ? I
^sanot remember.— *Nor if tiiere were "twitchings" ? I cannaC remember .-^You stated
yetftfepday^ that on the Sunday some broth was brought in* in a. breakfast-cup ; that you
Swear to ; between 12 and 1 o'clock ; that you took it up into Cook's bed*room ; you
tasted it, and drank about two tablespoonfuls ; that you were sick ; that you were sick
the whole afrismoon, and vomited at least twenty times ? I do not remember that I used
the words ** twenty timesw"

The Attomey-Generai.'-'^&lie did not ; it is in the depositions, but she did not say that
yesterday.

Mr. Serjeant Bhee. — ^The witness may be right ; I see she said she vomited till 5 o'clock.
Did you state one word about it in yotir depositions before the Coroner? It never
6B<$urred to me then; it occurred to me three days afterwards.— You Say H never oc-

46 TBUL OF WILLIAM PALMER.

cvrred to yon before the Coroner ? It did not. — ^Did yoa state tKis before the Cofr(»iep,
'* I tasted the broth ob the Sunday before Cook's death ; it 'was not made in this boose ;
I tboitgfat the broth very good after I had tasted it ; I belieTe some broth had been sent
over on the Saturday ; nothing peenliar was in the taste of the broth" ? No *, I could not
taste anything peculiar. — Is that what yoa stated before the Coroner ? I belieTe it is. — >
You had been before the Coroeer, and had retired, and were then recalled ? I cannot
remember Uutt. — ^Were you examined twice before the Coroner ? Yes ; I believe three
times. — On th^ first occasion your attention had been called to the £ict of broth having*
been sent over ? It was on one occasion ; I do not remember whether it was the first. —
On one oceasion yovr attention was called to the broth ? It was. — ^And you were asked
if yoa tasted it, were yoo not?,~!Yes. — And you did state yon tasted it, and thought it
very good after you had tasted it ; if it be true joo tasted it, and it made you sick, and
that yon vomited frequently in the course of the afternoon, how came it you did not
state that to the Coroner ? It never occurred to me ; I did not think it was the iMroth at
thse time. — 'I think ycm told us yesterday yon went to bed in consequence of the vomit-
ing ? Yes ; I did. — I suppose sickness of that kind, repeated frequently in the course
of an afternoon, is not a very common occurrence with you ; are you subject to be sick ?
No ; I hav« a bilious attack sometimes, but not such violent vomiting as I had that after-
noen. — Did yon ascribe it to any other caase at that time ? I could not at all account
fi>r it at that time. — ^You oi^ took two tablespoonfuls, I think ? That is all. — How soon
after did tlie vomiting come on? From half an hour to an hour.^On the Saturday
morning yoa say Cedk had fxffee for breakfast ; did he express a wish to have it ? I
believe Mr. Palmer ordered coffee. — Did he express a wish to you ? Not that I heard
him. — Do yoa mean to say, the first you heard, as far as you recollect, that his break-
fast was to be of cofiee, was from Palmer ? I do not know whether Palmer told me to
bring eofiee, or whether it was Mr. Cook ; I do not remember which, but I never knew
Mr. Cook to take cofliee in bed before ; be generally took tea. — I understood you to say
yesterday. Palmer came over at 8 o'clock and ordered a cup of coffee for Cook ; do yoa
adhere to that ? I cannot remember whether Pabner oi'dered it or not. — Yoa said yes-
terday Pabner ordered it? I do not remember it. — Did yoa not state yesterday that
Palmer came over at 8 o'clock, and ordered a cup of coSee for Cook, and ** I think I
gave it to Cook and put it into his own hands ; I did not see him drink it ; Palmer was.
there ;'' you stated that yesterday ; is that true or not ? If I said it yesterday, it is
correct ; bet I cannot remember whether Palmer ordered the coffee or not now. — Yoa
stated yesterday, when you were examined, that he ordered the coffee ; and you stated
that he came and ordered it, and you took it and gave it into Cook's hands, and Palmer
was there 5 is that true, or not? That is correct. — You swear to it now ? Yes.— You
doabted it a moment ago ? If that was stated yesterday, I do not doubt it was cortecL' —
Is that your only reason for stating it to be correct ? I believe it to be correct.

Lord Campbell read over the statement of the witness given in evidence yesterdi^.

Mr. Serjeant Shee. — Will yoa swear that is correct ? Yes. — You stated just now you
doubted about it, but that it is correct if you said so yesterday ? It is no doubt correct,
if I said so. — ^Why shoidd that make it more correct, if yoa cannot say it now from your
own recollection ? I cannot remember as well to-day as i did yesterday. — Did y^u statte
this before the Coroner : ** On Saturday he had coffee for breakfi»t about 8 o'l^ook ; he
ate nothing ; he vomited directly he had swattowed it ; up to the time I had giv«n him
the coffee I had not seen Palmer." Did you state that before the Coroner? That I
caiB|Ot remember. — ^Did you state before the Coroner, be vomited directly he had swaW
lowed it ? I cannot remember. — Can yoa renember whether you stated that part of ^hat
I put to you, '* Up to the time I had given him the coffee I had not seen Palmer**?
I cannot remember. — You stated yesteiday yoa saw a pill-box oa Monday nighty which
was sent over there about 8 o'clock wrapped up in paper ? Yes. — And that yo<a placed' H
on the dressing-table of Coin's bed-room ? Yes* — And you stated yesterday that on that
same evening you saw I^ilmer in Cook's room between 9 and 10 o'elodc ? Yes. — Did
you say a word about that before the Coroner? I do not remember; I might do; I
cannot remember that now. — ^Do not you kpow yon did not say that beltore -the Corooer?
Perhaps I was not asked the question by the Coroner ; I did not say any^ing, only
when I was asked. — Do you know whether you said- it, or not ? I emnot rememb^
whether I did or not. — ^Will you now swear he was there between 9 and 10 o^lock ? Ye«.
— ^I'hat he was there ? Yes ; he brought a jan of jeUy, a^ i epened it.

Lord Campbell. — ^At the Talbot ? Yes.
. Mr. Serjeant Shee. — Hew leng, about, after 9 will yoa swear he was there ? I cannot
remember; between 9 and 10; I cannot remember to a quaifter of an hour. — We do not
ei^et you to apeak to te^ miauteB or a quarter of an hoar ; was it nearer to 9 than 10?

SECOSD DA\V Way 15^ 1856. 47

1 should »7 it was nearer to 10 than 9 ; I shouid fuBtj sa-*Y«i my it was hal^Hpast 10

Yhen yoa left Cook, and you do not vecoUect -wlwtber Palmer was there then ? I do

not,— Then jou have no certain recoUection of seeing him tbere that night after that

time ? Not until he was fetched over. — Do you know when he took the pills ? I do not.

— ^Yoa stated yesterday that you asked him on the Tuesday afternoon what be thought

the cause of his illness was ? That was the first thing in the mommg ; Twesday morning.

—He was then composed : more comfortable ? Yes. — ^You then asked bin what he

thoaght was the cause of his illness ; did he say, " The pills which Pafaner ga^^* me at

half-past ten ;'' did you say that yesterday ? Yes. — Did yoa say that before the CoiODer ?

No.— Have you been questioned by any one since Mr. Cook's death respecting what yoa

did say before the Coroner, as to when these pills might have been given, or respecting

anythiug you said about these piUs before the Cforoner ? Yes. — ^Was that iat Hltcliingley ?

Yes.— Was that by Dr. Collier ? Yes. — Did you tell him that the gentlemen in London

had altered your evidence on that point, and that yonr evidence was now to be that " Cook

said the p'lUs which Palmer gave him at half-past 10 made him ill '* ? I did not tell him

Iht gentlemen had altered my evidenee. — ^Did yov state aiuything aboat your evidence

being altered since ? Yes. — ^What did you state ? He said ^* he had not got that down

in -what I had given to the Coroner in the Coronas papers ;" 1 said *^ Noy I tkought it

was down in some of the papers ; I had given it to a gentleman in Londou."— ^d yoa

say the evidence had been altered by anybody, or yoursell^ &in«e? It had been, altered

fy myself since ; it had occurred to me since. — ^Did you say who the ^ntlemaoa. was yon.

had given it to ? I could not say, because I did not remember. — Where had yoa given it

to anybody ? I gave it to him at Dolly's. — You have said in some of the papers ; were

there more papers than one there, besides the deposition? I believe that paper was the

only one, except Dr. Collier's. — But you did say in some of the papers ? Yes, thfe one

he had ; I gave it to Ae one at Dolly's. — Do you mean to tell the jury you did not know

to whom you gave it ? I ddd not ask the gentleman who he was, and he did not tell me.

Lord Campbell,. — Do yoa mean, that you do not know his name ? No, I do not.

Mr. Serjeant Shee. — A gentleman came to you at Dolly's ; did he tell yoa from whom
he came? No; he asked me, " Would I answer him a few questions?" I said»" Cer-
tainly ." He did not tell me who he was, neither did I ask him who he was.

Lord Campbelii. — You did not know who he was ? I did not«

Mr. SerjeaM Shee. — ^Where did you'see him, in a private room ? In a sitting-room. —
How long were yon with him ? Perhaps half an hour. — ^Did he ask you many questions?
Not very many. — Was he writing while you were answering the questions? Yes. — Did
not he tell you who he was, or whom he eame from ? He did not. — Or what it waA
wmtcd for ? No. — ^Did he mention Mr. Stephens's name ? Yes. — ^What did he say about
Mr. Stephens ? Mr. Stephens was wi^ him ; he called Mr. St^hens by name. — ^Why
did yon not tell us that before ? You did not ask me. — ^Then, ahhongh you did not know
who he was, you knew he was an acquaintance of Mr. Stephens* because he came with
him ? He did. — And all you said then was taken down ? Yes.— Did you say before the
Comuer that when Cook was ill on Monday night, and sitting up in bed beating the bed-
clothes, Cook said, " I cannot lie down, I shall sofiPocate if I do " ? I do not remember
whether I said that or not to the Coroner. — Did you say before the Coroner his body
and neck were moving and jerking ? I do not know whether I mentioned the word
jerking ; I know I said his body and neck were moving constantly, or something of that
sort. — Do you knew you did not use the word jerking ? I am not positive about it ; I
niight, or I might not. — Did yon say before the Coroner ** he would throw his head baok
and raise himself up again " ? Yes. — You will say you said that ? Yes. — ^Did you say
he was jumping and jerking all over the body ? I do not know whether I mentioned the
word ** jerking ;" I said the whole of the body was in a jumping, snatching way. — Did
yoa say it was dilBenlt for him to speak, he was so short of breath ? Yes, I believe I
did.— Did you say he called aloud " murder " twice ? No, I did not mention that to the
Coroner. — Did ymi say that the fisgevs did not move? I cannot remember.— Did you
say as sooa as he thonght yoa had vnbbed his hands sttffide&tly he thanked you ? Not
to tibftCoreiker, I dkfc not^^You did not say what you have already told me, that yon
iKJtaeed him to twitch while yoa were rubbing his hand ; you did fiotsay that, did you ?
Kofc that I cam rentmber.— Or anything to tbat efifect, anytixiBg expressing the same
neaning ? I am. sare I do not remember dow.-«^4)o mot yoti know you did not state to
the Coroner anythin^'meansng the same tfadng as tiiat yon notieed him to twitch while
70U were mbimig his hand ? I eaniiiot remember. — Did you say before 1o the Coroner,
'.'Mr. Cook said the pills stedL last iA luathroftt, he oofddaotswai^ That I

do not remember. — That is & remarkable cijreumstaaee ? I did not auswer tiie Coroner
anything mote than he asked me ; il he had asked me these* questions they woM have

48 TIBIAL OF WILLIAM PALMER.

been answered the same as I am answering them to yon.— Did yon state to the Coroner
that Palmer told yon to ^Te him some toast-and-water in a spoon ? No, I did not. — ^Did
you state to tiie Coroner that you did give him toast-and-water in a spoon» and that he
snapped at the spoon, got it between his teeth, so that it was difficult to get it out of his
month P I did not.*— Did you state to the Coroner that his head and neck moved forward
together, and that it was in that way he got the spoon ? I did not. — Did yon state that
while anything of the kind was going on the water got down his throat, and he got the
pills down? Yes.

Lord Camfbeix. — I understand yon propose most properly to put these depositions
in evidence ?

Mr. Serjeant Shee. — ^Yes, I do, my Lord.

Lord Campbell. — Then it is hardly worth while to put these questions.
' Mr. Serjeant Shee. — ^For several days the jury will have in their mind the statement of
the prosecution.

Lord Campbell^ — ^I think most nncerely a witness can hardly be expected to know-
all she said during a long examination.

Mr. Babon Aldebson. — Is it not more reasonable and fair that the jury should now
see the manner in which these questions were put by the Coroner.

Mr. Serjeant Skee.—*l propose, my Lord, as soon as this examination is done, to read
the depositions as part of my case.

The Attorney-General, — I should have interposed, and submitted that the witness was
entitled to hear the depositions read, were it not that I am prepared with evidence, which.
I shall presently induce, to show repeated expostulations were addressed to the Coroner
on the score of his omitting to put the necessary questions ; and above all, omitting ta
take down the answers that were given. The Coroner did not call on her to make her
Statement, but put questions to her.

Mr. Serjeant Shee. — ^There is no doubt the depositions mifst be read, and I have said
from the first I propose to read them. I am not aware it is necessary to read them,
before you put these questions, and there is a reason why it should not be. I have
acted to the best of my judgment in the matter, and looked at the cases before I took
this course. I have only another question or two to put. Did you tell the Coroner he
snapped at the glass when Palmer gave him a draught, when he gave him the spoon ? I
did not: if the Coroner had asked me to describe the full symptoms, I should have done
so j&om beginning to end, but he did not : he asked me question by question, and what
they were I do not recollect. — You would have answered these questions if they had been
put to you? Yes. — ^The first time that you were examined was that gentleman
Dr. Taylor (powtinff to Dr, Taylor) present? I believe he was ; I could not swear to the
gentleman, but I believe sa

Lord Campk:ll. — Ehcamined where ?

Mr. Serjeant Shee, — ^Before the coroner, my Lord. Were you not recalled after you
had been examined once, for the purpose of describing the symptoms for Dr. Taylor to
hear ? I was not. — ^Were you examined as to the symptoms on any occasion when you
knew the medical gentlemen were there ? I was not. — I will take you now to the next
night; did you observe how Mr. Palmer was dressed when he came over on the Tuesday
night, when you went to fetch him, and he looked out of the window ; how was he
dressed ? It was on the Monday night I stated^ to the coroner how Palmer was
dressed, not on ^he Tuesday night ; I cannot recollect what sort of a cap he wore.

Mr. •Tom^s.^She said yesterday he said he had never dressed so quick in his life, but
nothing was said about how he was dressed.

Mr. Baron Aldebson. — ^The question was not asked, because I made a note m my
minute %hat it should be asked.

Mr. Serjeant Shee. — On Tuesday night, when he came over after the illnesB of
Mr. Cook commenced, how was he dressed ? He had a pUdd dressing-gown on ; but I-
cannot remember what sort of cap he had, whether it was a drab one or a black imt»-^^
Did you observe how he was about the neck and throat ; had he a shirt on, or any
collar, or any appeaigince of a man who had been up, or who had only lately got out of
bed ? I do not know I noticed particularly about it. — You oould not say whether he
had his night-shirt on or his day-shirt on? No. — Or whether he had' slippers on, or
boots or shoes ? I cannot remember.-— You were asked yesterday^ towards the tilose of
your examination, upon, the subject of your going into the roras after Mr. Cook's deatth,
at the request of Mr. Jones, and you stated that Mr. Jones eame out, and said to you'
upon the landing! '< Palmer wants you. in Mr. Cook's room/' or •" WiU you go in?"t

SECOKD DAT, May 15, 1856. 44

fie stad either *^ Palmer wants ^oa/' or " Will you go in ? " pointing towards the door $
I do not recollect the words.— -Did yon say you saw Palmer, ten minutes after Mr. Jones
told you to go into the room, with a coat in his hand, searching the pockets ? Not ten
minutes after Mr. Jones told me to go in ; as soon as Mr. Jones came out he desired
me to go into the room, which I did at once. — ^Then you did go in at once as soon atf
Jones told you to go in? Yes. — Was it then you saw Palmer handling the coat?
Searching the pockets of the coat. — Then ? Yes. — Did you state before the coroner
tiiat Palmer, when you went in, did not seem at all confused ? I did not discover any-
thing about him that looked like confusion. — Do you remember stating that ? I do not
remember. — Did you state you saw him search under the pillow and bolster, and that he
just turned the corned up, as a gentleman would do looking for a watch ? Yes. — ^And
that at that time he had the coat in his hand? Yes. — Do you remember the room in
which the examination of Mr. Cook's body took place ? Yes. — >Will you endeayour to
describe that room ; how many doors are there to it ?

Mr. James, — I shall produce, myLords, in re-ezamination, a model which, I belieye,
shows the situation of that room. We may lus well hare it now.

[A model of Palmer's house and the hotel opposite was produced, and the position
of the room and buildings explained.]

Mr. Ser;eant Shee. — Does this describe the long room in which the body was exandned
[pointing to the model]'? I think it does. — ^Where does that door lead to? Into a
sitting-room. — Is there air^ outlet but tliat? Yes; there is another door. — Does that ^
into another bedroom ? On to the landing. — ^There is a gaslight nearly opposite to hjs
room ? There is no gas at all on the landing. — ^There is a gaslight in the street, nearly
opposite Palmer's house ? There is a lamp over Mr. Masters's door, the Talbot Arms. —
Is that a gaslight ? Yes. — Do you know the width of the street between the two
houses ? No, I do not.

Mr. Serjeant Shee, — I have no mibre questions to put to this witness, and I now propose
that the depositions should be read.

LfOrd Camfbcix. — It is quite proper it should be so.

[The deposition of the witness taken before the Coroner was read by Mr. Straight.]

Re-examined by Mr, James,

How long do you think you were under examination before the coroner altogether ;
about how long ; an hour or two ? Perhaps a couple of hours. — On different occasions ?
'Ye^^ — You said you were never asked before the coroner to describe all the symptoms
you. saw ?. No. — Who put the questions to you ? The coroner. — ^The coroner himself ?
Yes.— And who wrote down your answers ? The coroner's derk, I belieye. — ^The cleric
took them down, and the coroner put the questions ? Yes. — Did you do more on that
examination than answer the questions the coroner put to you 2 No ; what he asked
me I answered. — You say the coroner did not ask you to make any full statement of the
symptoms and all you saw, but put the questions to you ? Yes.

Lord Campbell. — Did he ask what effect the broth had on you ? — The coroner asked,
me if the broth had any effect on me, and I said not that I was aware of.

Mr* Ba&on Aldebsok. — That is not down.

Mr. Serjeant Shee. — What brought to your mind afterwards the yomitin^ after
taidiig the brotii ? just explain it to the Judge and jury. I do not know ; I believe it
was some one else in the house that mentioned my sickness first. — It did not occur to
yoa^ j^a betiere some one else mentioned it? Yes ; I believe some on^ else mentioned
it first.

'i^acd Gamebbll.— When ? Perhaps a week after the coroner was there.
Mr. Jam^s, — You must not state what that person said ; but who was it ?^ I cannot re-
jB^mber who it was, but it was some of my fellow-servants in the house. — Is it the fact you
Ttgerm vomiting after taking the broth ? Yes. — And that you went to bed ? Yes.'— Does
Lavinia Barnes know that^ Yes.^ — ^Your deposition makes you say, " I got to the room ;
be said it was the pills that made him ill ;" I am speaking of going into the room next
xmnaaaag] " he took the pills about half-past ten ;" what do you mean by that ? He said,
" 2 took the pills.'*— What did you say before the coroner ? I believe I said before the
ccxroner, " t^ pills I took at half-past ten " I cannot exactly remember."— You believe
you indd, ** the pills that I took at half-past ten;'' but you cannot remember the
ezjbet Words^ YeSw-*^ It was when I saw him the next morning, at eight o'clock, he said
he itibodght the pills made him ill ;" that is what Mr. Cook stated to you ? He smd, ** the
pills given me at half-past ten ;" those were the words. — You say that a person of the
name of Dr. Collier called on you ? Yes.— Do you see him in court ? Yes.*--Which is the

IK) TRUL OF WILLIAM PALMEB.

geatleman? The one there (pointing to Dr. Collier), — Dii he make anj representation
to 70U of what he was? He said he was for the Crown. — ^Wh&t else did he say he was ?
He asked me questions about the inquest and about the death of Mr. Cook. — ^When was
it he came to you and said he was for the Crown ? I do not remember the day of the
month. — ^But about how long since ? It might be three weeks or a month, or more since.
—Where did he find you? At Hitchingley. — What statement did you give him 4 did he
ask you questions ? He did. — ^Did he take down any statement of yours ? Some little,
not all ; some he wrote down, not all. — Did you see him write down something you said?
Yes. — ^Did he take away with him what he wrote down ? Yes. — ^Did Mr. Collier ask
you to sign it ? No ; he did not. — ^How long was he writing anything from your lips ?
I cannot exactly remember ; perhaps it might be half an hour or three-quarters. — ^Where
was it you saw him ; in a room in the house ? Yes.

Lord Campbeix. — ^Did he read over to you what he had takem down ? I cannot
remember whether he did or not ; I believe not.

Mr. James, — ^Was any other person with him ? I believe there were two persons
outsicle, they did not come into the house ; I «aw two join him. — Should yon know them
again ? I cannot say I should, I merely saw them at the garden gate. — One question
about the broth ; was there any taste that struck you in the broth when you took it ? I
tasted turnips and celery. — Nothing more than the taste of the broth ? Nothing but the
vegetables. — Did you ever taste tartar emetic ? I have not. — ^You do not know whether
Ihere is any taste in it or not ? No. — How long were you living at the Talbot Arms
altogether ? Two y eajrs. — ^You said Mr. Cook once had a gargle for his throat ? Yes. —
What sort of a gargle was it ? A liquid in a bottle. — Do you know what the ordinary
gargle for a sore throat is ? No, I do not ; but I have seen him take some in his mouth,.

firgle his throat, and spit it out. — Did he get that from Mr. Thirlby ? I believe it was ;
think I remember the label on the bottle. — Is that Mr. Thirlbjr -who was Mr. Palmer's
assistant ? Yes. — ^Do you know Mr. Thirlby ? Yes. — What is he ? A chemist and
druggist. — ^Do you know whether he succeeded to Palmer's business ? I believe he did.
— You say you have been living with some friends, the family of the Duttons : have
you been engaged to be married to one of the Duttons ? I am engaged to one.

Mr. Serjeant Shee, — Will your Lordships allow me to put one question to this witness ;
was not what Dr. Collier said there, " I am not for the Crown " ?

Mr. Baron Alderson. — It is better Dr. Collier should be absent from the Court. If
he is to be examined as to facts, he ought not to be here at all ; he is here under the
&lse pretence of being a doctor.

Mr. Serjeant Shee, — I believe none of the witnesses are out of Coart, my lord.

The AUomey-Qeneral. — A^ the witnesses as to facts are out of Court.

Mr. James, — There are two Courts provided for them for that purpose.

The Recorder, — We have vacated our Courts for the verypurpose of accommodating them.

Mr. Serjeant Shee, — The question is, whether this is not what Dr. Collier said to her,
'' I am not for the Crown, nor for the defence, nor for anything but tiie truth ; I am for
neither party, nor fthything but the truth " ?

Lord Caupbell. — You hear that ; were those the words Dr. Collier spoke to you ?
He asked me, " was I Elizabeth Mills ?" I said " yes ;" he said, " would I answer him
a few questions ; I said, " certainly ;" he said, " I am for the Crown, I want you to speak
with neither favour nor affection, I merely want the truth and nothing but the truth."

Mr. JAMES GARDNER sworn.— Examined by the Attorney- General,

You are an attorney, and a member of the firm of Lander, Gardner, and Lander at
Rtigeley? I am. — You are the agents, I think, for Messrs. Clayton, Cookson, and
Wainwright of Lincoln's Inn, -vf^ho are the attorneys of Mr. Stephens the step-father of
Mr. Cook ? I have acted for them in reference to Mr. Cook's afiBairs. — I believe Mr.
Stephens, when he came down to Rugeley after the death of his step-son, brought a letter
to you from the firm in London with whom you correspond ? He did. — Did you attend
the inquest which was held on the body of Mr. Cook ? I did. — Did you take any part in
the proceedings ? I put questions.

Lord Campbell. — Mr. Ward was the Coroner ? Yes. — Is Mr. Ward an attorney ?
He is my lord.

The Attorney-General, — ^Did he put questions to the witness ? He did. — Who took
down the answers ? His clerk.— Had you on behalf of Mr. Stephens occasicm to expos-
tulate with liie Coroner as to questions which he put, or questions which he -omitted
to put ? On several occasions.

The Aitomey-General.'^lt is said here is fresh evidence, and we will show you iiow

SECOND DAT, Mat 15, 1856. 51

tliat fresh evidenee did sot oome to be taken before ^e Coroner. How often did yon
expostulate with him on that ? Several times each day.

Lord Cahpbeix. — How long did the inquest last ? I think five days, I am not qnite
sure.

Mr. Serjeant Shee. — ^I submit these questions ought tp be confined to the time of the
examination of Elizabeth Mills.

Lord Campbell. — We ought to know how these thin|;s are conducted. The evidence
I have taken down is, " I expostulated with the Coronev as to the questions he put and
omitted to put, several times a day." What was said thf re is part of the transaction of
taking the evidence. It cannot be evidence against the prisoner, but it may explain thA
manner in which the depositions are taken.

Mr. Serjeant Shee, — I submit, my Lord, it was merely a statement of the opinion of the
witness as to the manner in which the Coroner was discharging his duty.

The Attorney-General. — The question I put is this : had you occasion to expostulate
with the Coroner on the omission of his clerk to take down answers.

Mr. Serjeant Shee, — The question should be, " Did the clerk take down your
answers."

Lord Cabifkell. — While Elizabeth Mills was under exfumination, was any objection
made as to the manner in which her evidence was taken down ?

The Attorney-General. — I would ask that; did you observe, while the examination
w^ going on, that the clerk omitted to put down answers given to the questions which
had been put ? Certainly.

Lord Campbell. — ^While Elizabeth Mills was under exiimination ? I cannot swear
that ; I cannot apply that to Elizabeth Mills' examination.

The Attomey-GeneraL — ^When did it arise ? I can only Bt4te it generally in this way>
that when the depositions of the witness —

Mr. Serjeant Shee, — I submit, my Lords, this is not evidence.

The Attorney-General, — ^Do I understand you to say you exclude the evidence of
BUzabeth Mills ? Certainly not. — Do you recollect whether, |n the course of the exa-
mination of Elizabeth Mills, any complaint was made of the omission to take down
answers ? I cannot swear to that. — But do you recollect generally that in the course
of that examination you had occasion to complain of the clerk not taking down the
answers.

Mr. Serjeant Shee. — ^I object to that question.

Mr. Baron Aldebson. — I think yon have forgotten she said she answered all the
questions put to her.

The Attorney-General, — Do you remember whether Dr. Taylor, in the course of the
examination of Elizabeth Mills, objected that some questions were not put by the Coroner
that ought to he^vLt ? No, I do not.

The Attorney-General, — ^Then your Lordships think I ought not to put the question as
to the omission.

Lord Campbell. — ^You must do it more specifically. It is not suggested that the
Coroner refused to correct, any mistakes that were made. Yoar question is, had he
occasion to do so and so.

The Attorney-General. — It wmld not be right for me to say what I am prepared to
prove through tiiis witness on^Rie subject. I am prepared to show such misconduct a»
led to expostulation not only from this gentleman but from others. The object of the
e-videnee I now propose to give is twofold. Firstly, to show that questions were not put
whieh mi^ht have been put and ought to have been put ; and, secondly, to show even
that questions were put and answers given, which answers were not taken down. I
cannot prove it in the individual case, but I am prepared to show that was the general
conduct pursued in the inqniry.

Lord Campbell. — We think that is too general.

Cross-examined by Mr. Serjeant Shee,

After the examination by the professional men (the Coroner and the gentlemen
attending professionally) did the jury put several questions ? A great many.

The Attorney-General, — You have been asked whether the jury asked questions; did
the jury make observations as to the necessity of putting questions ? Very Btr(«ig obser-
Tations. — What did they say ?

Mr* Serjeant Shee objected to the qnestioa.

» 2

52 TRIAL OF WILLUM PALMER. "

Lord Campbell. — ^That is part of wtat they do ; you must have the whole.

The Attomey-Qeneral. — What are the strong observations they made ?

Mr. Serjeant Shee. — I submit that question cannot be asked.

The Attorney-General, — At the time they put questions did they assign any reason for
iheir interference in the examination ?

Mr. Serjeant Shee objected to the question on the ground that it did not come within
the scope of the single question he had put.

Lord Campbell. — You aske^ whether the jury put questions : then what we are to
determine is whether we are to receive in evidence the preface that they made in putting
those questions.

The Attomey-Generdl. — Upon aay occasion when the jury interposed by the questions
to which my friend referred, did they preface the questions with any observations ?

Lord Campbell. — My brothers think the preface is not admissible.

Mr. Justice Ckesswell. — 1 have that feeling. My brother Shee has now put in the
deposition, and therefore I am at liberty to advert to what they do not show. They do
not show any questions put by a juryman, or any answer as given to a question put by a
juryman. If that had been the case it might itself on the face of the paper have shown
what was the motive of the jurymen in putting it, because we should have been able to
judge whether these matters wera inquired into before or not, but we are left in the
dark on the depositions as returned, whether the questions were put by the jury or not,
or whether it is a voluntary question put by the witness. So that we have not a proper
foundation for the question put by the Attorney-General.

Mr. Baron Alderson. — The utmost extent you can go is to show the deposition of
Elizabeth Mills contains a statement of questions put by the jury as well as the Coroner.
As the deposition does not* state one or the other, it will show the deposition is incor-
rectly taken.

Mr. Justice Cresswell. — It may be inferred from the very feet of the jurymen
putting a number of questions, that questions had not been put eliciting to their satisfac-
tion the facts of the case.

Mrs. ANNE BROOKS sworn. — Examined by the Attomey-OeneraL

Where do you live ? In Manchester. — I believe you are in the habit of attending
races ? Sometimes. — Were you at Shrewsbury races in the November of 1855 ? Yes.- —
Do you know that the prisoner Palmer was at those races ? Yes, I saw him there.—
Had you any occasion to go and speak to him ? Yes, I had. — Which day was that? On
the 14th. — That was the Wednesday ? Yes. — What time did you go to see him ? I met
him in the street on the first' occasion. — What time of the day? Eight o'clock in the
evening. — Did any conversation take place between you then ? There was.

Lord Cabipbell. — What was said ? I asked him if he thought his horse would win
on the following day.

The Attoniey*General.*^'Wh2it horse was that ? A horse he called the Chicken. —
That horse was to run on the Thursday ? Yes. — ^Did anything further pass on the
subject of ihe horse Chicken ? Palmer asked me, if I heard anything further about
the race on the following day, to call on him at the Raven hotel that evening. — ^What
sort of information did he want; was that understood? — ^About a horse called Lord
Alfred. — With reference to some other horses that were to run in tlie race? Yes.**—
Was that ail that passed at that time, or anything more ? ^^o, merely sayings *' Be sure
you call if you hear anything."-«Did you go to see him that evening'? Yesw— nAt the
Baven ? Yes. — What time was it you went to the Baven ? It would be half'f>ast lO^
I had some friends with me, and they waited below. — ^Are you certain as to the hour?
what means have you of knowing what time it was? As I passed the clocks in the
Market-square I noticed the time ; I said if it were any later I should not like to call.-^
You went oa to the Baven, and your friends waited down stairs ; did. you go up ? Yes,
I went up.

Lord Cajhpbbll. — ^Up to the first floor? Yes, a servant was going up at the moment ;
I went and asked her to be good enough to tell Palmer I wanted to see hmi.

The Aliomey-General. — When yon got to the to^ of the stairs. Is there a lobby or
passage there ? Yes, there is one fiLciug, and the other to the left. — When yon got to
the top Of the stairs, which way did you turn ? To the left. — Did you at that time know
which room Palmer was occupying ? Yes, I had called frequently at the Raven hotel. —
Had you called there before during the races? I had called the evening befdre, but
he had gone off to Rugeley. — ^You knew his room? I knew his room, but I never

SECOND DAY, MAY 15, 1856. 53

ivent in.— You knew the sit^ng-room which he occupied? Yes. — ^You say you turned to
the left of the passage which went off to the left ? The servant called my attention by
saying, *' He is there, ma'am." — Did the servant point to his room or to himself? Just
xnov^ her head ; she had a tray in her hand; she said, ** He is here, ma'am." — Was he
there ? did you see him personally ? Yes. — Where was Palmer at that time ? He was
standing at a small table. — In the passage, or in the room ? In the passage. — Did yon
observe whether he was doing anyUiing? what was he doing ? He had a tumbler glass,
something similar to that {pointing to a tumbler). — What was he doing with the tumbler
glass ? He had it in his hand when I saw him first. — Could you see whether there was
anything in it ? There appeared to be a small quantity of water in it ; liquid it was, of
the colour of- water. — You do not mean it was water coloured, but a liquid of the colour
of water ? Yes. — Did you see him do anything with this glass, or wiui the water in it,
or what appeared to be water? I did not see him put anything in it. — He had the
tumbler in his hand ? Yes. — Did he do anything with the tumbler ? He turned it in
this manner, round. — Do you mean shaking the fluid up that was in it? Yes. — Was
there a light in the passage ? Yes, there was a light where I stood. Mr. Palmer was in
the shade.— Was there any light near him ? The light was nearer to me. — You say he
was shaking the fluid up that was in the tumbler ; did you see him do anything with the
tomhler ? He said, '* I will be with you presently," and he held it up just in that form,
as if he were looking at the light. — And then he made an observation to you ? Yes. — >
What did he say ? He said, ** I will be with you presently." — When did he first aee
you ; could yon tell that ? He noticed me the moment I got to the top of the stairs.^
After he had said " I will be with you presently," where did he go ? He stood a few
minutes longer, perhaps a minute or two longer, at the table. — What was he doing during
that minute or two ? He had the glass in his hand. — Was that before he held it up to
the light, or afterwards ? He held it up once or twice during the time he stood there.— »
In the intervals between the time when he held it first, and held it up afterwards, did he
hold it still or continue to shake it ? I did not observe him all tiie while, but I did
observe him shaking it now and then. — While he was. standing there, shaking the glass
now and then, and holding it up to the light, did any conversation between you take
place ? He made an observation about the weather ; what very fine weather we had. — -
Was the weather fine ? It was. — After this, what became of him? There was a
sitdng-room, partially open, adjoining Palmer's sitting-room, and he carried the glass
into the sitting-room. I supposed, at the time, it was unoccupied, for I heard no one
speaking when he went in. — How long was he there ? About two or three minutes. —
Did he then come out again ? He came out a^in, — Had he the glass still in his hand ?
He had. — Was what you saw in the glass still of the colour of water ? Yes, it was. —
"What became of him then ? He carried ii into his sitting-room. — How soon after that
did he come out to you ? I should think three or four minutes, to the best of my
recollection.

liord Campbell. — Was the door of his own sitting-room shut when he went in ?
The door was shut ; he shut the door after him.

The Attorney- General. — He was there for three or four minutes, and then he came out
to you: did he bring you out anything? He brought me a glass-«-it might be the samo
one, it was very like it — with some brandy-and-water in it. — 'The glass was like it»
but the fluid was different? Yes; I had the brandy-and-water. — I hope that produced
no unpleasant consequences on you? It did not. — Did any conversation take place
between you after he came out ? Yes, about the race on the following day. — Did he tell
you in tlie course of the conversation whether he had or whether he had not been backing
his own horse Chicken ? He said he should back it. — Were you present at the race
whbn Chidsen ran? Yes, I was.— Chicken lost, I believe? Yes.— I do not know
vrfaetfaer you afterwards heard from Palmer whether he had won or lost on the race ? I
did not.

Cross-examined by Mr. Serjeant 8hee»

Is your name Brooks? Yes. — Has that always been your name?^ That has been
my name. — You are not a married woman, are you ? I am married. — ^And that is the
name of your husband? Yes. — -You are in the habit of frequenting races, I believe?
Yes, some few near home ; but I had other business at Shrewsbury on that occasion.*~Do
you go alone, or does your husband go with you ? My husband never goes. — Do not you
live with your husband ? Yes. — Do you attend many races in the course of the year ?
Not many. — May I ask what your husband is? He holds a very high appointment ; he
holds a public office : my husbaild does not sanction my going when he knows it. — I will
not ask you any questions that are unpleasant ; ]^ou are on terms, I suppose, of friendly
acquaintance with a great number of these racing men ? I am.— XX> you happen to

54 TRIAL Of WttLIAM PALMER.

kaow a Mr. Herring? lie goes by the name of Howard on tlie tarf. I never knew him,
to my recollection, until I met him at Staffordshire before the Grand Jury. — Do you know
him by sight ? No, I do not. — My reason for asking you was, I intended to ask you if he
had been unwell on the Wednesday : do you know whether other racing men were taken
ill on the Wednesday at Shrewsbury ? There were a great number ; one of my company
was dreadfully ill, and there was a wonder what could cause it : we made an observa-
tion, we thought the water might have been poisoned in Shrewsbury : we were all
affected in the same way by sickness. — ^Without going itito it much in detail, can you tell
me in what way it affected persoi^ ?

The Attorney-General. — Any person you saw ; did you see any person affected? They
were sick and purged. — Whom did you see yourself affected in that way ? There was a
lady that came to meet me there ; she was one ; and there was another party in niy
company— in fact, he was so ill he could not go to the races on Thursday.

Mr. Serjeant Shee. — I think I heard you say they were affected with sickness anid
purging ? They were. — You saw Palmer with the glass in his hand ? Yes. — Did he put
it up to the light ? He held it just carelessly up ; I did not see any substance in the
glass. — Did he hold it between his eyes and the light so that be could see if there had
been anything floating in it ? He held it up just in thatj form (holding a glass Mp). —
Where was he doing this ; was it a passage that led to a great many rooms ? It was. — ^
Was there more than one light in it ? I could not say positively. — Is it a gaslight ?
I think it was a chandelier. — You have stated he said " I will be with you presently," and
he held it up to the light : did you not say, as some of us understood you to have said,
** he held it up to the light, and said, * I will be with you presently ' " ? He said " I will
be with you presently*' when he carried the glass into the room which I supposed to be
unoccupied. — Did he also say that while he was holding it to the light? Yes, just in
this manner, quite carelessly. — Nothing at that time to excite suspicion ? Quite calmly,
— And at that time you thought nothing of it ? I thought he was mixing up some cooling
draught, and he was waiting for water. — You were not examined before the coroner? No,
I was not.

The Attorney-General — Was the brandy-and-water he gave you hot or cold? Cold. —
You say you are acquainted with many of the men who frequent the turf; have you been
on intimate terms with Palmer ? On friendly terms. — For how long ? A great number
-of years I have known him as a racing man.

LAVINIA BARNES sworn.— Examined by Mr. James.

In November, 1855, were you in service at the Talbot Arms? Yes. — What were you
there, in what capacity? Waitress. — You knew Palmer, the prisoner? Yes. — Did you
also know Mr. Cook ? Yes. — When had you seen him ; on the 12th of November, as he
was going to Shrewsbury races? Yes. — He called there? Yes. — In what state did he
appear then as to health; did he speak to you ? Yes. — How did he appear as to health
and spirits ? He seemed much as usual. — What was that ? He seemed very well, I
think ; he did not complain of anything. — Did you see him on his return from Shrews-
bury on the 15th; I think that was the Thursday? Yes. — On the Friday do you
remember his coming back after having dined with Palmer? Yes. — About what time
did he return to the Talbot Arms after dinner? I saw him between 9 and 10. — Did he
speak to you ? Yes. — ^Was he sober ? Yes. — Did you attend him to his room, or was it
Elizabeth Mills ? Elizabeth Mills. — Now on the Saturday did you see him ? Yes. — Did
y<«i *e^ him frequently during the Saturday ? I saw him twice. — Do you remember on
th^ Saturday some broth being sent over? Yes; — Was that broth taken up to Mr. Cook?
Tes. — By whom ? I took it. — Did Cook drink that broth, or not ? No ; he said he could
not take it, he was too sick. — Did you thereupon bring it down ? Yes. — Where did you
put it when you brought it down and he refused to take it ? In the kitchen. — After you
had brought the broth down and put it in the kitchen, did you see Palmer and tell him
anything ? Yes. — What did you tell Palmer about that broth ? That Cook could not
take it ; he was too sick. — Did Palmer make any reply? Yes. — ^What did he say ? That
he must have that. — Was that broth afterwards taken up again to him ? Yes. — By whom ?
The chambermaid, Elizabeth Mills. — On the Sunday do you remember some more broth
being sent over? I did not see it.— Do you remember whether Elizabeth Mills was taken
ill on the Sunday, or not ? Yes, she was. — About what time, do you remember? Between
12 and 1, 1 think. — Where did she go to firom her work ? She went to bed. — Did you see
her vomiting yourself? Yes. — Was it violent? Yes. — How long did she remain ill
before she came back to her work ? I think it was between 4 and 5 when she came down
again. — Did she complain to you at the time of having been ill from the vomiting ? Yes ;
the said she felt very sick. — Did you see any broth upon the Sunday in the basin ? I saw
it in the kitchen; I did not see it brought. — ^Uad that broth been made im the Talbot

SECOND DAT, Kat 15, 1856. 55

Arms or not ? I do not knov. — On the Sunday do yon remember seeing Palmer in the

morning at the Talbot Arms ? Yes.-* About what time did yon see him ? Between 7

and 8 in the morning. — Did he say anything to you about where he was going ? No, not

^ me.— In your presence ? Yes, — What did he sav ? He told Elizabeth Mills he was

^ing to London. — ^There is one question I omitted: you cannot tell whether that broth

was made in the house ; what sort of a cup was it in ? It was in a sick-cup with two

handles. — Was that a cup belonging to the Talbot Arms, or not ? It was not. — Do you

know what became of it ; was it sent away ? The cup went back to Palmer's. — On the

Monday you say you heard him tell Elizabeth Mills he was going to London ; during that

day did you see Cook several times ? I did not see him till af&r dinner. — Did you see

him during the day? Yes. — Do you remember any one coming to see him ? Yes. — ^Do

you remember Mr. Saunders, the trainer of Hednesford, coming? Yes. — ^Did you take

anything to Cook's room while Mr. Saunders was there ? Yes, some brandy-and-water.

— ^Wherc did you sleep that mght j where was^ your room on that Monday night ? The

next room to Mr. Cook's. — On the Monday night did Palmer come ? Yes, I saw him, —

About what time, as near as you can remember ? Between 8 and 9 I think. — Where did .

he go ? I saw him go up-stairs. — Was that in the direction of Cook's room ? Yes. — Did

you see him in Cook^s room that night, or did you only see him go up-stairs? I saw him.

in Ckx>k^8 room afterwards. — How late did you see Palmer in Cook's room on that Monday

night? Between 12 and 1 o'clock. — That was after Cook was attacked, after you saw

him go up stairs. — I do not remember seeing him in the room before 12 or 1. — At about

12 o'clock were you alarmed by anything? Yes. Whei:* were you then? In the

kitchen. — You had not been to bed? No.— What were you alarmed by? Mr. Cook's

bell rang violently. — That rang into the kitchen? Into a passage by the kitchen. — Did-

you go up stairs ? Yes. — What did you observe when you eot into the room ; what did

yoa find there ? Mr. Cook was very ill, and asked me to send for Mr. Palmer. — Did you

hear any screaming ? Yes. — What did you hear; tell us all that you heard? He was

screaming ** Murder" and in violent pain ; he said he was snfiEbcating.

Lord Campbeix. — You went up stairs ; did you then go into Cook's room ? Yes.

Mr. James. — He said he was suiOFocating ? Yes. — ^Did yoa observe anything about his
eyes? — ^Yes.

Mr. Serjeant Skee objected to the question.

Lord Campbell. — The question is correct.

Mr. James, — ^Did you observe anvthing about his eyes ? They looked very wild, and
were standing a great way out of his head. — Did you observe him doing anything with his
Jbands ? He was beating the bed with his hands. — ^Will you describe in what way ? ^ la
this way, when I saw him first (describitig it). — Did you leave for the purpose of sending
the Boots for Palmer ? Yes. — And left Elizabeth Mills there ? She was not there then. —
When did she come? I went and called her afterwards. — In screaming what did you
liear him call out? He was screaming/' Murder I" he said he was suffocating; he called
out " Murder I" he said, ** Christ have mercy on my soul I" — ^Had you ever seen any person
in such a state before? No. — ^You sent the Boots of the hotel over for Palmer? Yes.—
Did he come? Yes. — ^Did you go up into the room again after Palmer came ? Yes. — In
'what state was Cook after Palmer came ? When I saw him again he was more composed.
— Did he speak to Palmer in your presence? Yes. — What did he say to him? "Oh,
doctor, I shsdl die !" or some words like that. — Did Palmer make any replv? "Do not
be alarmed, lad." — ^Do you remember any piUs being given ? I did not see them given.—
Did you see him drinking anything at all ? Yes. — ^Explain what it was you saw r I saw
him drinking a darkish mixture in a glass. — ^Did you see who gave him that ? I cannot
remexnber who gave it him ; I saw it in his hand. — Was Palmer in the room when it was
^ven? Yes< — Did yon observe anything when he put that glass to his mouth? He
snipped at the glass. — ^Did you hear his teeth snap at the glass ? Yes.--pid you say you
saw the glass in Palmer's hand or not ? I cannot remember who gave it him.—There was
this snapping or biting at the glass ; did you see it, or hear it ? 1 both saw it and heard
it. — Did that black-looking draught remam on his stomach or not ? No, he vomited it.—
What time did you leave him that night after this attack ? Between 12 and 1.— How was
lie then ? He was more composed. — Did you see him on the Tuesday ? Yes. — During
the whole of the time you saw him on Tuesday you say he seemed better ? He was better
on the Tuesday. — On the Tuesday night were you alarmed again? Yes. — ^About what
time was that, and by what were you alarmed ? A few minutes before 12 Mr. Cook's bell
rang again.— Whwe was that? In the kitchen.— What did you hear? The chambetw
maid, Elizabeth Mills, went up stairs to answer the bell. — Where was she when the beU
rang ? In the kitchen with me.— What did you do ? I followed her up stairs.— Did yoa
^ into Mr^ Cook's room ? Not then, I did not — ^Did you hear any noise ? I heard him

56 TKIAL OF WILLIAM PALMER.

•oreuiL— Where did yov go ? I stood on the laodiiig, bj the door. — ^Did yon see Pafaner
come? Yes. — Who fetdied him? Elisabeth Mills.— <Were you on the landing when
PsJmer came ? Yes. — Where did Palmer go ? To Mr. Cook's room. — ^Did yon speak ta
him as he came along by you ? Yes, — ^What did you say to him? I said, '* Mr. Cook is*
ill again."— What did he say? *'0h, is her and he went into the room.^Did you
obsenre how Palmer was dressed ? Yes. — How was he dressed ? In his usual way. — >
What was that? With a black coat on. — Was there anytlftng peculiar about his diess?
Nothing more than usual ; he had a cap on. — ^Where did you remain after he had gone
into Mr. Cook's room ? On the landing. — ^Did you hear what was going on inside ? No^
I did not. — ^Did you go into the room after some time? Yes, aner I*almer came out
SAUn. — Did Palmer come out? Yes. — ^Did he go down stairs and away for something?
'^s. — ^When he came out of the room did he sp^^E to you ? Yes. — Did you speak to him
first, or did he speak to (you? I think he spoke to me first ; I am not quite certsdn. —
What did he say ? He said, ** He is not so bad by a fiftieth part as he was the night
before." Did you hear Elizabeth Mills speak to him? Yes. — ^What did you hear
Elizabeth Mills say to him as he went down ? I heard her ask how Mr. Cook was.—
What ^d Palmer say ? He made the same answer, " Not quite so bad by a fiftieth
part."

Mr. Babom Aldisbson. — ^Did he say it twice ? We were both together, and he said it
tons both.

Mr. James, — Did you go in the room or not before he died? Yes. — Do you remember
seeing Mr. Jones there in attendance upon him ? Yes, he was. — ^What did you hear pass
befbre he died ; do you remember his making any request of Mr. Jones ? I heard him ask
to be turned over. — How soon was that, after you had gone into the room, you heard him
ask to be turned over? I was not in the room when I heard that— Was the door partially
open when Palmer had gone out ? No ; Palmer was in when he asked to be turned over.—
What did you see done then ? I was not in the room when I heard him say that.— You
did not go into the room then? Yes, I did. — When you went into the room what did yon
hear or see done then ? I cannot remember what I heard ; I do not remember hearing any-
thing. — How soon did he die after you had got into the room ? I came out again be^re
I heard of his death. — Did you see him die ? I did not — ^You were not in the room whexk
he died ? I was not. — ^After he was dead were you in the room when Palmer was there ?
Yes. — ^IXd you see Palmer doing anything with any clothes of his ? He had a coat in his
hand when I went into the room. — What did you observe him doing with that ? He was
feeling in the pockets. — ^Did you see him do anything else with the clothes or the bolster?
He felt under the bolster.-r-£nd you say anything when you saw him doing this ? Yes ; I
sud, ** Oh, Mr. Cook cannot be dead I" he said, ** He is ; I knew he would be." — ^Did yoa
leave him in the room with the dead body ? Yes. — ^This was on the Tuesday ; do yoa
remember seeing Palmer on the Thursday following ? Yes. — Where did he come to you ?*
I met him in the hall. — ^In the hall of the hotel ? Yes. — What did he say to you ? He
asked me for the key of Mr. Cook's bedroom. — That was the room in which the body
lay ? Yes. — Had you the care of the key ? No ; it was in the bar, and I fetched it —
Did he tell you, or say anything, or give any reason why he wanted it ? He said he
. wanted some books and papers, and a paper-knife. — ^What for, did he say ? They were to

Si back to the stationer's where he had them from, or he should have to pay for them. — •
id you go into the room with him ? Yes. — ^While you were in the room with him did he
request you to go to Miss Bond's for anything? Yes, for some things she had.

Lord Campbell.— What things ? Books.

Mr. Baron Alderson. — She was the housekeeper ? Yes.

Mr. /ofiMs.— -Yon went down widi a message with which he had sent yon? Yes.^-
Did you go back to the room? Yes, and took the hooka with me. — What sort of books
were they ? One had a green lining on it — They were books for reading, novels ? Yes..
>— When you came back with the message, did you find Palmer still in Mr. Cook's room?
Yes. — ^What was he doing in Mr. Cook's room when you came back ? Looking for a
paper-knife. — Where was he looking ? On the chest of drawers, among some books and
clothes belonging to Mr. Cook. — How do you know it was a paper-knife he was looking
fbr ? He told me he coold not find it. — What was it he said to you ? He said, '^I.
cannot find the knife anywhere." — In what drawers was he searching : were there > any
pfl^rs of Mr. Cook there when he told you he could not find the knife anywhere ? He
was not seardiing in drawers ; it was on the top of the drawers^-— Afterwards did Miss
Bond, the honsekeeper, come into the room, and you left ? Ye8.--^You remember Mr.
Jones coming on the Tuesday, the same Mr. Jones of Lutterworth tibat slept in his
room? Yes. — Did you see him on the Friday with Palmer? Yesw— Did you hear
Mr. Jones say anything to Palmer about Mr. Cook's betting-book ? Yes.-^Wliat did he

SECOND DAY, May 15, 185d» 67

say ? He asked him if he knew where it was.— What did Palmer say ? I camiot
Tcanember what he said Bow.^-Did he say anything about looking for it ? Yes, he said
*' it woald be sore to be found ;" and he asked me and the chambermaid to go and look
for it

Lord Campbell.— Who said " it would be sure to be found " ? PalnJer.

Mr. James. — This was on the Friday ? Yes. — ^When he said " it would be sure to be
found,'' and you were to go and look for it, did he say anything more about it? He
said, " it was not worth anything to anyone else but him." — To Mr. Cook I suppose he
meant ? Yes. — About what time on the Friday was this, do you remember ? Between
3 and 4 o'clock, I think. — Do you remember Mr. Stephens being at the Talbot Arms ?
Yes. — How long was this before Mr. Stephens left the hotel when Palmer said the
betting-book would be of no use to anybody ? Mr. Stephens left about half-past 4
o'clock.— -After this had been said, did Palmer say anything about going with you to
look for it ? We went up stairs to look for it, and could not find it. — Palmer did not go
up with you? No. — Did you hunt everywhere for it? Yes, we searched the beds. —

•The drawers ? We did not look in the drawers ; we looked under the bed and all round

the room.

Lord Campbell.— Were those the drawers that had been used by Mr. Cook ? There
were two chests of drawers in the room.

Mr. James. — ^Were thej locked or open ? Open. — Did you go down and state you
had not been able to find it? Yes. — ^Wnom did you see ? Mr. Palmer and Mr, Jones.^ —
You told Palmer you could not find it ? Yes. — What did Palmer say to you ? He said,
** Oh, it will be found somewhere ; I will go with you and look myself." — Did he go
idth you? No. — ^What did he do then ? He went out of the house, and I did not see
him uterwards. — You stated that Palmer had been there on the Thursday, and had been
alone iu the room ;- how long was PSdmer altogether in Mr. Cook's room on the Thurs-
day ? I do not know what time he came out ; I did not see him come out. — You opened
the door for him to come in, and did not see him come away ? I cannot remember seeing
him. — ^Why did you not look in the drawers ; was there any reason for your not search-
ing. there for the betting-book ? There was no reason whatever.

Lord Campbell. — ^Why did you ^not expect to find it there? There were some
people in the room with Mr. Cook's corpse, nailing the coffin, and they stood at the side
^f the drawers.

Cross-examined by Mr. Serjeant Shee,

Yon say that some broth was sent up, and that Mr. Cook could not take it ; he was
too sick ; and that Palmer came over shortly afterwards and said *• he must have it ;'*
were those the words ? Yes.— Did he say why he must have it ? No.— Did he say
anything to the eflFect, " Why, he has eaten nothing for several days " ? I cannot remem-
ber that he did. — Did he ask whether anything had been eaten by him? Not of me. —
Ydu know in iact that Mr. Cook had had no substantial food ? He had coifee and cocoa,
and something like that.

The Attorney-General. — ^You will recollect that he dined at Palmer's on the day before.

Mr. Serjeant Shee, — Just so : I had forgotten that. — ^What time was that on the Saturday ?
Between 12 and 1 o'clock. — ^You say tiiat on the Monday evening you saw Palmer
"between 8 and 9 o'clock going up stairs, and you did not see him again until Mr. Cook
was taken ill about 1 2 o'clock : you say between 8 and 9 o'clock ; are vou sure it was
"before 9 o'clock ? I am not quite certain. — Are you sure it was before | past 9 o'clock ?
No. — You did not pay any particular attention at the time, I suppose, to what the exact
lioiir was? — ^I did not. Are you quite sure it was before 10 o'clock ? — Ye*. You knew
lie had been to London ? — Yes. Did you know about what hour the train came back
from London ? — I did not. Is there an omnibus from Rugeley or a fiy to go to the
station ? — ^Yes, there is an omnibus from the hotel that goes to &e station. — What time
does it go ? — ^About ^ past 7 it starts from the hotel. — How many miles has it to go ? It
is not one mile from the station. — Do you know at what time the express train comes in
to Bn^eley fropi London ? I do not. — Can you give me any notion of it? I cannot.—
Does It stop at Rugeley : do yon know that ? I do not. — But yon think it must have been
before 10 o'clock Uiat yon saw Palmer come in: do you persist in that? I think it was.
— May it not have been a quarter past 10 o'clock ? you can easily have been mistaken
about an hour : are you quite certain it was before 10 o'clock ? I cannot remember now.
' — Yon have stated that when Palmer left on the Monday evening, he gave Mr. CwAl some-
thing to drink in a glass ; he snapped at the glass, and you said, '* I cannot reinember
who gave it to him r ' did you see the glass in Mr. Cook 8 hands ? I saw him drinking,
but I do not know whether it was Palmer or the chambermaid that gave it to hinu-^Did

58 TWAL OF WILLIAM PALMER.

yoQ see the glass in Mr. Cook's hand ? I cannot remember ; I saw him drinking. — ^Did
yoa see his hand up to the glass ? I think I did. — His fingers were ronnd the glass in
the usual way, as when a man holds a' glass to drink ? I think it was as if he was going
to catch hold of it ; but somebody else was holding it. — Did you see the hand touch the
glass ? I cannot remember that. — Perhaps you cannot be quite sure whether he did not
hold the glass himself? I remember some one was holding it for him. — Might he not be
holding it too ? He might. — You told us just now you did not search the drawers ; there
were some undertakers who were doing their office in the room : were the drawers full of
Mr. Cook's linen ? There was some in. — In all the drawers? In ^ome of the drawers.
— ^Se^eral of them, I suppose ? Yes. — ^Had Mr. Cook many clothes there ? Yes. — ^Two
or three suits of clothes ? I cannot say how many ; there was a portmanteau, full. —
Besides what were in the drawers ? Yes. — -And I suppose a great-coat ? I cannot re-
member exactly ; he had an ovei'coat there. — And dress-clothes ? Yes. — And morning
clothes ? Yes. — How soon after the death of Mr. Cook was the door locked ? I cannot
remember how soon ; it was locked that night.

^ The Attorney-General, — ^You mean the night of the death? Yes, after the corpse was
laid out it was locked.

. Mr. Serjeant Shee. — Were the women sent for to lay out the corpse during the night,
before it was daylight ? Yes. — ^And, as soon as they had done that, was the door locked ?
I cannot say whether it was as soon as that ; it was locked in the morning when I got up.
— ^Do you know who had the key ? Yes. — ^Who? Miss Bond, in the bar. — When did
the undertakers first go there ? The following morning. — How long were they there ?
I cannot say. — ^An hour or two ? No ; I did not see them come out, so I cannot say. — •
After they had been there, was the door locked again ? Yes. — Are you sure of that ?
Yes.2— Then, I suppose they had to come again with the dead-clothes and the shell of the
eoffin ? Yes. — ^When did they bring them ? I cannot remember. — ^Was it on the Friday ?
You saw them doing wprk at the coffin on the Friday, the day Mr. Stephens was there,
was it on that day ? I think the shell was in the room before that : it came on Thursday
night : I am not certain. — Do you remember at what hour they came ? No. — They had
the key, and were allowed to go up alone ; nobody with them : is that so ? Yes. — How
many of them were there ? I cannot remember. — On the Friday, when Mr. Stephens was
there, had they been long in the room then? They merely came to screw the coffin up.
— Had the body been put into the coffin the day before, or was it done then? It was put
into the coffin on that day ; the women put it in. — Then, the women were in the room
with the undertakers : was anybody else there besides the women and the undertakers ?
Me and the chambermaid were in. — Anybody else ? I do not remember any one else.-—
You were not there all the time they were there ? No. — You went out and in ? Yes.—
How many persons were employed about this by the undertaker ? I saw three.

Be-examined by the Attorney-General,

I understand you to say on the Tuesday night after Mr. Cook died, the door wag
locked ? It was locked before I got up in the morning. — ^When the women came to lay
out the body was the door locked then ; had it to be opened for them ? No, it was open
then. — They went in and laid out the body ? Yes. — Was any one with them at the time
they were doing that ? I was in, and the chambermaid was in. — Did you remain there
as long as the women remained there ? No, I went in and out — ^Was the chambermaid
there all the time? — No, I think not. — What I want to know is, whether the women were
left alone at any time ? Yes, they were. — How long were they there ? I left them there
when I went to bed, so that I cannot say. — Then you were about the room on that occa-
sion, after the death, while the women were laying him out ? Yes. — Did you show the
women into the room? — I did not. — Who did? I cannot say ; I did not see them go in,
— ^While the women were there did you see anything of a small book, like a pocket-book,
on the glass of the dressing-table ? i es. — Did you ever see that book there while Mr.
Cook was there ? Yes ; not after he was ill,* I never saw it ; I saw it before, but not
afterwards. — ^When was it you last saw it ? I cannot remember j I had seen him with it
in his hand.

Lord Campbell. — Did you see it at any time after his return from Shrewsbury races?
No.

The Attorney-General, — When you went up-stairs to look for this book you did not
look into the drawers ? I did not. — Did Mills ? I dp not remember she did ; she might,
i>ut I cannot say. — Where did you look ? I looked on the bed and under the bed ; she
helped me.

The Court here adjourned for a short time.

SECOND DAY, Mat 15, 1856. §9

ANNE ROWLEY sworn.— Examined by Mr. Welsby,
Do you live at Rngeley ? Yes.— Have you been in the habit of being employed as
charwoman by Mr. Palmer ? Yes.— Do you reriiember the Saturday before Cook died ?
Tes.— Doyou remember Mr. Palmer sending you to Mr. Robinson's, of the Albion, on
that day ? Yes.— For what ? A little broth.— For whom ? For Mr. Cook.— Did you
fetch it ? Yes.

Lord Campbeix.— Where is the Albion ? At Rugeley, in Albion Street.- How far is
h from the Talbot Arms ? A small distance. — It is an inn ?— Yes.

Mr. Welsby. — Did you bring it to Palmer's house ? Yes. — What did you do with it
when you got to Palmer's house ? As I was taking it through the back kitchen I put a
little salt, and I put it by the fire to warm ; it was not warml — When you had done so
did you go about your work in another part of the house ? Yes, I went in the back
kitcben again.

liord CAMPBEI.L.— Did you leave it at the fire ? Yes.

Mr. Wetsby, — Did Mr. Pal|ner bring it to you there, when it was hot ? Yes. ,

Lord Cabipbell. — ^Brought it to you where? In the back kitchen.

Mr. Welsby, — Did he pour it into a cap ? Yes. I held the cup, and Mr. Palmer
poured it in. — ^What did he tell you to do with it? That 1 was to take it across to Mr,
Masters's, for Mr. Cook. — Is Mr. Masters's the Talbot Arms ? Yes. — Did he tell you
anything more? I was to say tt» whoever I gave it to to ask Mr. Cook if he would take
a little bread or a little toast with it, and to say that Mr. SmiUi had sent it. — ^Did you
take it to the Talbot Arms ? Yes.

Lord Cajipb£ll. — Did he say why you were to say Mr. Smith had sent it? No.

Mr. Weisby. — Did he say what Mr. Smith ? It was Mr. Jeremiah Smith. — ^There is a
gentleman living there of the name of Jeremiah Smith, is there ? Not at Mr. Masters's.
— In Bugeley ? Yes. — What is Mr. Jeremiah Smith ? An attorney.

Lord Campbell. — ^Is that the Mr. Smith who goes under the name of Jerry Smith ?
Yes.

Mr. "Welshy, — Is Mr. Jerry Smith a friend of Mr. Palmer's ? Yes, he used to visit
Mr. Palmer. — Did you take it to the Talbot Arms ? Yes. — ^And gave it to Lavinia
Barnes, I believe ? Yes, I did.

Cross-examined by Mr. Serjeant Shee,

Was Mr. Smith in the habit of putting up at the Albion ? Yes, he goes there to his
meals a good deal, I think. — Were you so circumstanced respecting him as to know where
be might have passed the night upcm any particular night ? No. — ^You do not know
^where he slept on the Sunday night ? No. — Do you know whether he was intimate with
Mr. Cook ? Yes, I believe he was.

Lord Campbell. — ^Did you ever see them together ? I have seen Mr. Cook up at
Mr. Smith's.

Mr. Serjeant Shee. — Have you known them to dine together? No, I do not know that
I ever have : Mr. Cook was to have dined at Mr. Smith's that day, but he was not able to
go. — ^Do you know whose broth it was or who ordered it at the Albion ; have you the
means of knowing that ? The landlady and me took it up, I suppose by Mr. Smith's
orders.

Mr. Attorney-General — Did you know anything about it ?

Lord Campbeix. — What time do you think there was between the broth being
brought in to you and the time when it was taken to the Talbot Arms ? About five
lainates, I think.

CHARLES HAWLEY sworn.— Examined by Mr. Bodkin.

Are you a gardener residing at Rugeley ? Yes. — Were you occasionally employed
by the prisoner ? Yes. — Do you recollect going to his house on the Sunday before Mr.
iSwkdied? Yes.

Lord Campbell. — How were you employed for him ? As gardener.

Mr. Bodkin. — How came you to go there on the Sunday ? Mr. Palmer asked me
whether I would take some broth to Mr. Cook. — Where did you see him when he asked
jouthat? In his own house.

Mr. Bodkin. — How came you to go to his house on Sunday? I am in the habit of
^ing very often. — What time of the day was it when he asked you that ? Between
twelve and one. Did he give you the broth to take ? Ye8."What was it in ? In a
-small cup with a cover. — Did he tell you what to do with it ? To take it across to the

^0 TRIAL OF WILLIAM PALMER.

Ttlhot Arms for Mr. Cook.-— Did you do so ? I did.— Wm the broth hot ? I cannot
tell, I did not look at it.--Did you feel it ? No, I did not.— Whom did you giye it to ?
I gave it to one of the servant girls. — Do you know which? I cannot tell whether it
was Mills, I cannot say ; it was one of the two. — Either Mills or Lavinia JBarnes ? Yes.

SARAH BOND sworn.— Examined by Mr. ffuddleston.

Were yon the housekeeper at the Talbot Arms in November last ? Yes. — Did you know
Mr, John Parsons Cook? Yes, I did.— -1 believe he had been staying there during the
last year ? Yes, he had. — Do you reniember his going to the Shrewsbury races on 4he
12th of November ? Yes, I do. — ^When did he come back ; on Thursdiiy, I believe.

Lord Cakpbell. — ^There is no dispute about that.

Mr. HudcUesim, — Did you see him on the Thursday night ? Yes, I did. — Did he say
anything to you about his state of health ? I heard him say he was very poorly. — I
believe you did not gee him on Friday or Saturday ? No, I did not. — At what time did
you see him on Sunday ? I saw him about eight o'clock. — About eight o'clock in the
morning or evening? The evening. — Where was he? He was in bed. — Did he say

what he thought of Mr. Cook ; he told me he was better. — Had anybody slept in Cook's
room with him up to Sunday night ? On Saturday night he had some one with him. —
Did you say anything to Palmer about any person ? I mentioned to him about having
some one with him ; he said either him or Mr. Jerry Smith would be with him that
night; he would not be left. — That was on Saturday night? Yes.— -Did you say
anything to him about any person sleeping with him on Sunday night ? Yes, I asked
him whether he would not wish some one to be with him ; he said he was so much better
he would not require any one ; he would be much better without it. — Did you mention
the name of any one to sleep with him ? The Boots who lives there. — ^What is his name ?
Daniel Jenkins. — You asked him if Daniel Jenkins should sleep in the room ? Yes, I
did. — ^When you mentioned Daniel Jenkins's name did he say anything ? He ssdd he
would much rather he would not ; he was so much better that he would be better alone. —
Did you see Palmer again the next morning, the Monday morning ? Yes, I did. — At
what time ? It was a little before seven. — Where ? He came into the kitchen to me. —
Did he say anything to you? I asked how Mr. Cook was ; he said he was better, and he
asked me to make mm a cup of coffee. — Did he say how the cup of coffee was to be made,
whether it was to be strong or weak or how ? He did not say. — Did you make the
ooffee ? I did. — Did he remain in the kitchen while you made the coffee ? Yes, he did.
-—What did you do with the coffee when you had made it ? He took it from me ; I gave
it him, and he took it from me to take it to Mr. Cook.^ Did he say anything to you about
where he was going that day ? Yes, he told me he was going to London. — Did he say
anything about Mr. Jones? Yes, he told me he had written to Mr. Jones to come and
be with him, because he was going to London ; he thought it would be better. — Did yea
see Cook on the Monday night? Yes, I did. — You went up to his room I believe? I
went up to his room. — ^How came you to go there ? The waitress came and told me he
was very ill. — At what time was that? It was between eleven and twelve. — When you
went into the room was there any person with him ? Not any one. — Had you heard the
beU ring before ? No, I did not hear the bell ring. — Where was he when you went into
the room ? He was on the bed, he was sitting up a little. — In what state was he ? He
seemed irritable, he seemed to be rather disappointed that it was not Mr. Palmer ; he said
it was Mr. Palmer that he wanted.— Did you stay in tiie room or did you go out? *I
went out. — How long might you have been in the room altogether ? Not above two of
three minutes. — How was he in the bed when you went in ? He was sitting up a Uttlo,
resting on his elbow. — Did you go down stairs ? I did not go down stairs ; I was going
for a candle, but he told me not to get a candle, he did not want a light ; I went on the
landing. — Did Mr. Palmer come ? He did. — What took place when Mr. Palmer came ;
where were you ? I was on the landing. — Could you see into the room ? I could see
into the room.~Can yon tell me what was done ; did Palmer go into the room ? Yes,
he did, he went into the room. — What was done ? I could not see what was doing, but I
heard he was givinglum some pills. — What did Palmer do ; did he leave the room again ?
He left the room to fetch some medicine. — ^And then came back again ? Yes. — ^How long
was he away altogether? Not many minutes. — When he came back did you hear
anything in the room? Nothing but hearing Mr. Cook was very si^k 9sA very ill.— •
Was anything else said or done ? He told Mr. Palmer he thought he should die, and h^
must Aot leave him.

SECOND DAY, May 15, 1856. 61

Lord Campbell. — IMd yon hear that ? Yes. — ^Whcn yon were in the passage ? I
was in the passage ; Pahner told him he would do all he could to preyent that.

Mr. Hvddlestone. — ^Mr. Palmer came out again : did'you say anything to him about
Cook's relatives ? I asked him if he had any relatives. — ^What answer did he make ?
He said he had only a stepfather. — ^You did not see Cook again, I believe, till the next
day, the Tuesday ? On Tuesday I saw him. — ^When was that ? It was between 3 and
4. — ^That was when Mr. Jones came ? Yes. — Did you take him up anything during that
day ? I took him a little jelly.— At what time was that ? It was a little after 6.— I think
you did not again see Cook alive? No. — How was he when you took him up the
jelly ? . He seemed very anxious for it, and he said if he did not have something he thought
he should die. — Did he seem to you to be better ? I thought he seemed a little better. —
Yon did not see him again alive ? I do not Uiink I did. — On the Wednesday morning did
you get the key of the room? Yes, I did.— At what time in the morning? Between
8 and 9. — I believe you locked the* door ? Yes, — The door of the bedroom ? Yes. —
"What did you do with the key? I took care of it.— Did you ^ve it to any person ? I
gave it to Mr. Tolly the barber. — ^^When did you give the key to the barber? It was
about 9 o'clock. — On the Wednesday ? On the Wednesday. — Did you give the key to
Lavima Barnes on Thursday ? Yes, I did. — ^After you had given the key to Lavmia
Barnes on Thursday, did you go up stairs into the room? Yes, I did. — Who was in the
room when you went up ? I met Mr. Pahner just coming out of the room. — Did you
lock the door after he came out ? I am not certain whether I locked it or Mr. Palmer ; he
gave me the key. — ^The door was locked? Yes. — Did you give up that key when Mr.
Stephens came on the Friday ? Yes. — ^To whom did you give it then ? I think I gave it
to the undertaker.

Cross-examined by Mr. Grove,
At what time did you see Palmer on Monday evening ? It was about 12, a little
before 12. — Not before in the course of the evening? No, I had not seen him.— -Can you
tell me when the passengers by the express train from Ix)ndon arrive at Rugeley in tho
evening ? The last train which stops at Rugeley is about 8 o'clock. — That is not the
express ? No. — The express does not go to Rugeley ? No. — It is necessary for passengers
coming by the express to have a fly or some conveyance from Stafford ? Yes. — Can you tell
me at what time they would arrive in the ordinary course ? I cannot. — Would they
arrive much before 10 ? I cannot say. — Did you not say Cook seemed rather irritable
about Palmer not being there ? When I went into the room he seemed disappointed that
it was not Mr. Palmer ; he said it was Mr. Palmer he wanted. — Did he seem in other
respects unwell ? I thought he seemed worse than he was.— Did you talk to him at any
time? T offered to light his candle, but he told me not ; so I left the room. — How long
was the conversation you had with him ? Not above two or three minutes. — Then he
Was sittmg up in the bed, you said, I think? Yes. — Did you hear him on Monday state
anything about his illness the night before? That would be on Sunday night: he told
the chambermaid how ill he was.

Mr. Attorney-General, — Never mind what he told her; were you present? No, I was
not present when he was ill on Sunday night. — Did you hear him say anything about his
being ill on Sunday night? She told me.

Mr. Grove. — When you went in he said it was Mr. Palmer he wanted ? Yes. — I think
it was Barnes who told you he was so ill, which led you to go up stairs ? Yes. — What
had become of Barnes in the mean while ? She had gone to fetch the doctor. — The first
you heard of it was when Barnes came down in that way to fetch the doctor, she told
yon how ill he was? Yes.— -That induced you to go up stairs? Yes.— How soon after
you hsSt hia room did Mr. Palmer come ? Directly. — You remained upon the landing ?
Yes. — ^What led you to ask Mr. Palmer what relatives the man had ? I thought he
seemed so very ill that it was necessary to know. — ^Was it in consequence of what you had
seen when you went into the room ? Yes ; and after Mr, Palmer was in he seemed so
ill, he told Mr. Pahner he thought he should die.

Mr. WILLIAM HENRY JONES sworn.— Examined by Mr. Attorney General.

I ^believe you are a surgeon and medical practitioner living at Lutterworth ? I am. —
How long have you been in practice ? Fifteen years. — I believe you were intimately
aoqaatDted with the deceased Cook? I was.— Did he from time to time reside at your
house? He did. — How long had you been on terms of intimacy with him? Nearly
five years.— What aged man was he? IVenty-eight.— Twenty-eight when he died?
Yes.— 'UBmarried I believe? Unmarried. — And of no profession? No profession. —
Was he originally educated for any profession ? For the law. — ^I believe of late years
he had entirely addicted himself to the turf? Yes, and to agriculture a little.— Had he

02 . TRIAL OF WILLIAM PALMER.

any farm? Yes.-^Where? That was some yeaw ago; two or three yeaw agb. — For
thelast two or three years he had not? No. — Did he keep race-horses ? He kept raoe»
horses. — ^And betted on the turf? Yes.— Do you know when he became acquunted with
the prisoner William Palmer ? No, I do not. — How long have you known of their
intimacy ? More than twelve months I have known of their intimacy. — Did he consider
your house at Lutterworth as his home ? He did. — I suppose you attended him from
time to time professionally if there was anything the matter with him? I did.— What
had been the state of his health ? His health was generally good.— We have heard it
stated that he was not of a strong, robust consUtation, but his health was generally good ?
His health was generally good ; he was not very robust. — ^Was he a man of active
habits? Yes, in general.— I think he hunted and played cricJiet? Yes, both. — I sup-
pose you were aware when the Shrewsbury races were to take place ? Yes. — Did he
mvite you to come over and see his horse run? Yes; I had a letter to that effects—
And I believe you went over in consequence ? Yes. — Did you spend the Tuesday the
13th with him the day his horse ran? Yes. — That was Polestar? Polestar. — You
are aware I suppose that the horse won ? Yes. — ^He was staying at the Raven Hotel,
I believe ; you dined with him at the Raven Hotel ? I didw — ^And some other friends ?
Several others. — The horse having won, I suppose there was a little extra champagne ?
Yes. — How late did you stay? I stayed till 12 o'clock. — Did you remun at the table
till then? No. — What time did you dine? Between 6 and 7 we dined. — ^At what
time did the party break up? Between 8 and 9 I should imagine. — Did he
accompany you anywhere ? He accompanied me down the town to the house of Mr.
Frail, the clerk of the course. — You weregoing off by the train ? Yes. — Ou your way
to the train did you call at Mr. Frail's ? We went to Frail's. — Frail was the clerk of the
course I think ? Yes. — Were you ppesent at any conversation which took place between
Cook and Frail ? Yes ; and Whitehouse — Whitehouse the jockey— was there. — I sup-
pose the conversation turned upon racing matters? Entirely. — Do you remember
whether Cook produced his betting-book upon that occasion ? I saw him produce his
betting-book to Whitehouse. — Did he calculate his winnings? He did. — On the horse ?
Yes. — Did you see his book? I saw the book; I did not examine it. — Did you see
whether there were any figures in the book ? I did not examine them. — ^He made a
statement as to his winnings ? Yes ; he had seven to one. — At what time was it when
yon left? 10 o'clock.— Did you leave the hotel at 10 o'clock? Yes. — Did Cook con-
tinue with you, and did you continue to see him till that time ? Till 5 minutes to 10. —
Was Cook the worse for liquor at all ? Most certainly not. — That evening, when you
left him at 10 o'clock, you say he had not drunk at all so much as to affect his sobriety ?
Not the least. — ^Did he appear to you that evening to be otherwise than in his usual
health ? No, not otherwise. — I believe on the Monday after that you received a letter
from Mr. Palmer? I did.— Have you the letter? Yes. — ^WiU you produce it, and read it?

37ie scone was read as follows : —

%

" November 18, 1855. — My dear Sir, — Mr. Cook was taken ill at Shrewsbury, and
obliged to call in a medical man ; since then he has been confined to his bed here with
a very severe bilious attack, combined with diarrhoea ; and I think it advisable for you
to come to see him as soon as possible."

Witness. — That came to me on Monday morning.

Mr. Attorney-General, — I believe you were not well that day ? I was very unwell that
day. — On the next day, Tuesday, cud you proceed to Rugeley ? Yes. — ^What time did
you arrive ? About 3 o'clock, by the train. — ^You would get to the Talbot Arms, I sup-

Sose, about half-past 3 ? Yes^— Did you proceed to visit Cook ? Yes. — In what sta4e
id you find him ? He expressed himself to me as very comfortable. — Did you make
jmy inquiry of him as to what had ailed him at Shrewsbury ? " He had been very ill,'*
his expression to me was. — Did anything else pass upon the subject of Shrewsbury ?
Mr. Serjeant Sliee. — ^You will not ask him about anything but his health.

Mr. Attorney-General — ^What he had suffered at Shrewsbury? — ^No, he said he had
been very ill at Shrewsbury. — ^He did not tell you what the symptoms were under which
he had been labouring ? No ; he had been obliged to call in a medical man, he said. —
After that did Mr. Palmer come to the room where you and Mr. Cook were ? Yes ; he
came soon afterwards. — ^Did you examine Cook ia Pahner's presence ? I did.— Did yoa
feel his pulse? Yes. — What sort of a pulse had he? A natural pulse. — Did yon
examine his tongue ? Yes. — ^How was it? His tongue was clean. — ^Did you make any
remark? I made the remark to Palmer, ''This is hardly the tongue of a bilioas
diarrhoea attack,"— Did Palmer say anytixing up<m that ? Palmer said, " You should
have seen it before."^ — ^Did you prescribe or reoommend anythisg for him at that time ?

SECOND DAT, Mat 15, 1856. 63

No. — Did you visit liim again in th« coarse of that afternoon ? Several times. — ^During
the coarse of that afternoon on the occasion of those visits did you find that he oontinned
in the same state, or was there any change ? There was a change for the better ; hi«
spirits were better and his palse was better. — He seemed to yon to be improving? I
considered him decidedly improving. — ^During that afternoon was their any recnrrence of
the vomiting ? He did vomit that afternoon. I gave him a little toast-and-water, and
he vomited ; he asked me for it. — Was there any diarrhcea as far as you are aware ?
Certainly not — Where did the toast-and-water come from which you gave him? It was
in the room. — I believe that evening Mr. Bamford came? He did. — At what time did
he come? About 7 o'clock he came. — Had you learned before from Palmer that
Mr. Bamford had been attending ? Yes» he had informed me that he had called him in
to his assistance. — ^When Mr. mmford came what did he say as to the state of Cook ?
He expressed his opinion that Cook was going on very satisfactorily. ~«Was anything said
by Cook then about the previous night ? He objected to the pills the previous night. ~-
What led to his speaking about the pills of the previous night ? On examining him at
the time. — Did you ask him anything about the previous night ? It was mentioned — it
was mentioned what he should have, what we were to prescribe for him, and he objected
to having pills again. — Did yon, as the medical man, mention pills? Mr. Cook men-
tioned the pills.

Lord Campbeix. — ^When you were consulting what he should have he objected to
Jiaving the pills ? Yes.

Mr. Attomey-Oeneral, — ^What did he say about that ? I suppose Palmer was there
throughout the whole of the time ? Yes ; he said they made him ill the previous night.
—Do you remember what he said, and to whom did he address it ? That I do not
recollect. — After he had objected to ''aking the pills as having made him ill the previous
night, did you three medical men withdraw ? Yes, we did. — ^Tell us what passed then ?
Palmer proposed that Mr. Bamford should make up the morphine pills as before, at the
sune time requesting me not to mention to Mr. Cook what they contained. — On what
ground ? As he objected to the morphine so much. — ^What did Mr. Bamford say to
that? Mr. Bamford agreed to it.— Did they go away? He left.— Who left? Mr.
Bamford left. — ^Did you go back to Mr. Cook s room? Yes. — ^What became of Mr.
Palmer? I think he went with me to the room. — How long did he stop there ; have you
any recollection about it ? I have no recollection ; not long. — ^After that were you in
Cook's room in the course of the evening ? I was in and out several times ; I stopped
with him a short time and then left him. — What state was he in ? He was very comfort-
able all the evening.

Lord Campbell. — Within what space of time were you in there several times?
During the evening.

Mr. Attorney 'General. — Was there any more vomiting ? Not that I observed. — Nor
any diarrhoea ? No ; there was action upon the bowels, but not dian'hcea.

Lord Campbell. — Did you observe any bilious symptoms ? No, it was naturaL
Mr. Attorney-General, — I would ask you here whether you observed any bilious symp-
toms about him whatever? None whatever. — Had he symptoms of having recently
suffered from a bilious attack ? No. — ^You were in and out in the course of the evening,
after Mr. Bamford went away ; did Mr. Palmer afterwards leave ? Yes, he left ; he
went over to his own house. — Do you know about what time that was ? I think it was
about 8 o'clock I went with him to his house. — How long did you remain with him ?
From a quarter to half an hour. — Did you then come back to Cook's room ? Yes. — ■
At what o'clock did you next 'see Mr. Palmer in Cook's room? Nearly 11 o'clock. —
IMd he bring anything with him ? He brought a box of pills with him. — Did he show
you the box ? He opened them in my presence, and showed me the direction. — Upon
what was the direction written ? Upon a slip of paper. — Where was the paper ? Round
the box. — Did he call your attention to the paper? He directed m^ attention to the
paper, saying, ** What an excellent hand for an old man upwards of eighty to write !"—
What was the direction upon the paper ? I did not read it through,^ I merely looked at
the handwriting. — ^Was it a good writing ? A very good writing indeed. — After that,
what did Mr. Palmer do with those pills? Mr. Palmer proposed to Mr. Cook to take
them. — What did Mr. Cook say to that ? Cook protested very much against it. — On
what ground ? On the ground that they had made him io ill the previous night. —
What did Palmer s^y to %at ? Palmer repeated the request several times, and at last he
complied with it. — What happened after he had taken them ? After he had taken them
I left him ; I went and took some supper. — Did he retain them on his stomach ? The
moment he took them he vomited. — What did he vomit into ? Into the utensil. — Was
any search made in the utensil ? Search was made by Palmer, and myself at his request.

64 TRIAL OF WILLIAM PALMfiK.

— Search was made in the ntensU for what ? For the pifls. — To see whether they had
been brought off? Whether they had been returned. — By both Palmer and you ? Yes,
at his request. — ^At Palmer's request? Tes. — Did you find the pills? I found nothing
but the toast-and- water. — So that the pills had 'been retained?- The pills had been
retained. — Did he take the pills in the toast-and-water, or did he take the toast-and-
water afterwards ? He took them without anything. — ^When had he drunk the toast«
and-water ? It must have been previously : I do not know when. — ^What he brought off
was toast-and-water ? Yes. — And there were no pills in the toast-and-water ? There
were not; he had toast-and-water by his bedside. — As a medical man, should you say
that the contents of the pills could lutve caused vomiting? Certainly not. — It came so

fuiekly afterwards ? Certainly. — The act of swallowing possibly might have done so ?
should think not. — ^After he had vomited, what did he do? He lay down very com-
fortably, and we left hiuL — Did he appear quiet after that ? Yes, quite. — You said that
he seemed better before that ; had he become stronger than he was when you first
arrived ? He expressed himself as stronger. — ^Had he got up ? Yes, he got out of his
bed. — And sat in a chair? And sat in a chair. — ^That was before Mr. Palmer came ^d
gave him those pills ? Yes. — ^Was that between the time you went over with Palmer to
his house and the time Palmer came with the pills, or was it earlier than that he got np
and sat in the chair ? I can hardly recollect. — How was he in point of spirits that
evening? His spirits were very good: he was very jocose. — He was laughing and
joking ? Yes ; speaking of what he should do during the winter ; he spoke of hunting. —
He spoke of his fiiture plans and projects ? Yes. — After he had taken those two pills
which Palmer brought at 11 o'clock, did you remain in the room with him, or did you go
down stairs ? I went down stairs to have some supper. — ^At what time did you return?.
Very nearly 12. — ^Had it been arranged that you should sleep in his room that night ?
At his request. — ^It was a double-bedded room ? A double-bedded room. — Did you go to
bed after you went upstairs ? Yes. — How soon after you got upstairs ? I talked to him.
a few minutes, and then went to bed. — At the time you last talked to him before you got
into bed, how did he then appear to be ? Rather sleepy, but quite as well as usual. —
There was nothing about him at that time to excite any apprehension in your mind ?
Nothing at all. — ^After you went to bed, were you disturbed by him ? I had been in bed
10 minutes, according to my impression. — What happened then? He suddenly raised
himself up in bed.

Mr. Babon Alderson. — Had you gone to sleep ? — No.

Mr. Attomey'General. — ^Tell us what happened ? He suddenly started up in bed, and
called out these words : "Doctor, get up ; I am going to be ill ; ring the bell for Mr.
Palmer :" I rang the bell. — ^Who came ? The chambermaid came to the door, and he
himself called out, ** Fetch Mr. Palmer." — Called out to her ? Yes, to her. — ^Did he say.
anything to you ? He asked me to rub his neck. — Before [that, had he asked you for
anything? He asked me to give him something ; I said I had nothing with me.

Lord Campbell. — Something to relieve him he meant? — Yes; I said, "I have
nothing with me ; Mr. Palmer will be here directly." — In what position was he ? Sitting
up in bed at that time. — Did you observe whether there was anything in the expression
of his countenance ? Nothing very particular ; the room was rather dark. — Then he*
asked you to do something? To rub his neck. — ^Did he say why? I do not think lie
said why ; he said, ** Rub my neck." — Did you rub his neck for him ? Yes, and sup*
ported him. — What part of the neck ? The back part of the neck. — How was he sup-
ported ? He was supported by my arm at the time.

Mr. Serjeant Shee, — When you were rubbing him ? Yes.

Mr. Attomey-GeneraL — ^Did you observe anything about the back of the neck you were
rubbing ? There was a stiffness of the muscles ; a sort of hardness about the neck. —
How soon after the chambermaid went away did Palmer come ? Very soon indeed ; two
or three minutes at the utmost. — Did he make any observation when he came in ? . He
made the remark, ** I was never so quickly dressed in my life." — Did you observe hovr
he was dressed ? I did not ; I was so engaged. — Did he bring in anything with him ?
He gave him two pills ; he told me they were ammonia pills. — ^What did he do with them ?
Cook swallowed them. — After he had swallowed the pills, what next happened ? Directly
he had swallowed them he uttered loud screams. — That was directly after he had swal>
lowed them ? Yes ; be threw himself back in the bed, and was dreadfully convulsed. —
I presume that, as ike pills had been immediately before taken, it could not have been,
from tlic action of those last-taken pills ? Certainly not. — You ^ay he was dreadfully
convulsed ; did he say anything ? He said to me, '* Baise me up, or I shall be suffocated.'*
— How long did the convulsions last? Five or ten minutes. — -Was that before he called
out to raise him up or he. should be suffocated ? At the time ; that was at the commence-^

SECOND DAT, Mat 15, 1856. 65

ment of the conTiikioiis. — ^Let me andecstaQd ; you say he threw himself back on the bed
and was convulsed ; was it at the time he threw himself back upon the bed he called out
to be raised up ? Yes ; just after he was down. — The eonvulsioiis then setting in, as I
understand you ? Yes. — You say he was dreadfully convulsed ; over what parts of the
body did those convulsions extend ? All the muscular fibres ; there was a violent con-
traction of every muscle of the body and a stiffening of the limbs. — When he^ called out
to you to raise him lest he should be suffocated, what was done f I endeavoured to do
so with the assistance of Mr. Palmer, but I found it was quite impossible, — Owing to
what ? Owing to the rigidity of the limbs ; when he found that I could not raise him up,
lie asked me to turn him over. — Did you do so? I did; he was quite sensible. — He was
then quite sensible ? Quite sensible. — What happened next ? I listened to the action of
his heart. — Was that after you had turned him over ? Y'es. — What did you find ? I
found it gradually to weaken ; I requested Palmer to go and fetch some anmionia for
him ; some spirits of anmionia. — To revive the action of the heart ? Yes, as a stimulant.
— ¥or the purpose of reviving him, I suppose ? In the hopes of doing so.— Did Palmer
leave for that purpose ? He went to his house and fetched a bottle. — How long was he
gone ? A very short period, — What should you say ? Not above a minute ; he was
very qoick. — When he came back, in what condition was Cook ? The heart was gradu-
ally sinking, and life was almost extinct ; he died very quietly. — How soon after Palmer
returned did he die ? Very soon afterwards ; he was not able to take the ammonia. —
From the time when he first roused you to the time when he died, what period in your
jadgment elapsed ? When he first called upon me, do you mean ? — From the time when
he raised himself in his bed, and called upon you to go for Palmer ? I suspect from ten
minutes to a quarter of an hour. — Of what, in your judgment as a medical man, did he
die ; what was the proximate cause of death ? He died from tetanus in my opinion.—
How in ordinary English parlance should you express the meaning of that ? Locked-jaw.
—Does it involve, ordinarily speaking, a mere locked-jaw ? Yes, that is the common
term. — Locked-jaw is one of the symptoms of tetanus ? Yes ; every muscle in the body
was affected in the same manner ? — How should you express in ordinary English the
general symptoms of what you call tetanus in one word ? Violent spasmodic afi'ection of
all the muscles of the body. — In what way does that affect the immediate cause of
death so far as you are aware ? By stopping the action of the heart, and also the breath,
from its effects on the diaphragm. — Does it affect the respiratory muscles ? Yes, cer-
tainly ; it stops respiration. — Is it that spasm of the respiratory muscles which causes the
sense of suffocation ? Yes. — When death took place, was he still upon his side ? He was
upon his side; — After death ; in what position was he when he was dead ? Upon his side
still. — Did you turn the body upon its back ? No. — Did you observe what was the
outward appearance of the body after death ? It was very dark ; I could not make the
observation I otherwise should have made; there was only one candle in the room. — Had
you any opportunity of observing in what position his hands were ? Yes, clenched. —
i3oth hands ? Both hands ; the left hand particularly, which I had in my hand. — How
soon did you observe that clenching of the hands ? Immediately the attack took place,
when he threw himself back. — At the time you were rubbing his neck, did you observe
anything the matter with the hands ? No. — At what part of the attack ? When he threw
himself back. — Which you say was immediately after taking the pills Palmer brought
over ? Yes. — When you were rubbing his neck, you did not at that time see the hands
clenched? No. — Did you observe either before or at the time of death, or immediately
afterwards, anything in the position of the head and neck ? Yes ; the head was quite
bent back. — When you say quite bent back, do you mean bent back into an unnatural
position ? Yes.

Lord CA.MPBELL. — ^By spasmodic action ? By spasmodic action.

Mr. Attorney' General. — Did you observe whether there was any effect produced by
spasmodic action in the formation of the body as regards the back r Yes, the body was
tivisted back like a bow ; the back-bone was twisted back. ^

Lord Campbell. — ^When did you observe that appearance? Immediately after
death, or all the time ; indeed, after Uirowing himself back, he was immediately drawn
back.

Mr. Attomey-General.^^lf you had placed the body at that time upon the back, in
^hat position would it have rested ? Upon the head and heels ; if I had placed the body
ia that position upon a level surface, it would have rested upon the head and heels. —
Did you observe anything inomediately after or at the time of death about the jaw ? No ;
his face was turned away from me, I could not notice that. — After death, did you see
"Whether the jaw was in its natural condition, or whether it had been affected by spas-
modie.action ? It was all i^ffected by spasmodic action.^ After he was dead, did Palmer

E

6« TRIAL OF WILLIAM PALMER.

say any diiog to you npon the subject of any claim he had upon Cook ? Yes, it was
mentioned afterwards. — ^When was that? That night ; not exactly a daim.

Lord Camfb&ul.-— When was it? Soiae time after the death, that night.

Mr. Attome^Generah — How long did Palmer remain, after the death ? From half an
hoar to an hour, I should think. — ^I^ he desire yon to send a woman-servant in to
him ? No; that was a suggestion of my own. — ^What did you suggest? That we should
have some vomen to lay him out. I went out of the room to speak to the housekeeper,
and told the two servants to go in ; the two maids were standing on the steps just by. —
How long after that did Palmer remain ? He was some time after that. — Yon went
down stairs ; how long did you remain down stairs ? I remained a few minutes down
stairs with Miss Bond the housekeeper, and I returned and found Mr. Palmer in the
room with Mr. Cook's coat in his hand. — What did he say ? He remarked to me, ** Yon,
being his nearest friend, had better take possession of his effects." — ^Did you take pos-
session of anything ? I did ; I took possession of his watch and his purse containing
five sovereigns and five shillings ; that was aH I could find. — You did not find any bet-
ting-book, nor any papers? No. — Any letter? There were two letters which I had
brought with me. — ^Where did you find those letters? Those letters I had brought
with me from the country. — You had delivered them to Cook ? Yes, and he said he
would see them in the morning. — Had they been opened ? I had just opened them ; he
had told me to do so ; they were letters from his brother ; they were not letters of im-
portance. — After that, before Palmer left, did he say anything to you upon the subject
of afiairs as between Cook and himself? He did. — ^You said you found five sovereiens
and five shillings ; did yon fiod any bank notes? None whatever. — ^Now tell us wnat
passed between Psdmer and yourself upon the subject of their afiairs ? He said it was a
bad thing fbr him Mr. Cook was dead, for he was responsible.

Lord CAMPBELL. — Give us the words? That is it as near as I can recollect. — ^He
said " it is a bad thing for me" ? Yes.

Mr. Aitotmey-GeneraL — What " is a bad thing for me" ? That he died, for hejwas
responsible.

Lord Campbell. — He said " I am responsible," I suppose ? Yes, ** I am responsible
for 3000/. or 4000/., and I hope Mr. Cook's friends wjll not let me lose it;" that if they
did not assist him, all his horses would be seized on,

Mr. Attorney-General. — If they did not asust whom ? " If they do not assist me all my
horses will be seized on." — ^AU whose horses? Palmer's horses.

Lord Campbell. — He said ** I hope Mr. Cook's friends will not let me lose it, for if
they do not assist me all my horses will be seized." Yes.

Mr. Attorney-General, — Was anything said by him about securities or paper? No,
nothing more than that. — I think you were present when Mr. Stevens his step-father
came? Yes, I was.— Did you hear what passed between them on the subject of the fu-
neral ? Yes, I heard some remarks ; Mr. Palmer said if Mr. Stevens did not bury
him, he should himself. — Was there any question then about Mr. Stevens not burying
him ? No, I do not recollect it. — Do you remember how the observation arose ? I do not
recollect. — I believe you dined together that day ? We did.

Lwd Campbell. — With whom? Mr. Stevens, Mr. Palmer, Mr. Bamford, and
myself.

Mr. Attorney-General, — After dinner did Mr. Stevens make any request to you about
Cook's books and papers ? Yes; he requested me to go and look for his betting-book.

Lord Campbell. — Where did you dine ? At the Talbot Arms,

Mr. Attorney-GeneraL-^Ai what time of the day was this? About mid-dajr; about 2
o'clock I think. — ^Mr. Stevens, I think, was going off that evening .'' Yes. — Before he
went, you say he asked you to go and look for his betting-book ? Yes. — Palmer being
then present? Yes. — Did you go out and look for it? I went and searched, and he
came with me. — Who did? Palmer. — How soon did he follow you after you went
out of the room ? Directly afterwards. — ^Was anything said by him upon his following
you ? He had told me previously, on the night Cook died, ** the betting-book will be
of no use to any one," that it most probably would be found. — What was said then
upon the subject of the betting-book ? It was mentioned. — What led to this ; how came
you the night of the death to have any conversation with him upon the subject of the
betting-book ? On taking possession of the effects. — Did you make any observation upon
the subject of the betting-book ? I think I did. — ^He told you, as his friend you ought
to take possession of his effects, and you told us you did take possession of some
effects? What I could find. — Did you look for the betting-book. — Yes, in a very-
cursory way; I looked on the mantel-piece. — IXd^yoji find it? No.— Not &iding it, did

SEC03ID DAY^ May 15, 1856. 67

3rou make any remaik? No, no pardenlar remaiiE; he said, " It ia sui^ to be found,
but it is of no use to any one."— Did he know what yon were looking for ? Yes.—
How ? I Mid *' Where is the betting^Mwk ? "—Yon asked him, when you did not find
the betting-book, ^ Where is the betting-book ? " Ye8.^Upon that ha said, ** I have no
doubt it will be found, bat it is of no nae to any one " ? Yes, ** aU the bets are void."
--Are yon rare he said thsit to yon, **ali the bets are Yoid" ? I am certain of it;
** When a person dies," he said, ** aU the bets are Toid." — ^I do not know whether yOn
are suficientiy acquainted with the tnrf ? I am not acquainted witii it at alk — Now, I
will go back again to the Friday ; yon say he went np stain with you when he went into
Cook's room to look for tiw betting-book? Yesv — l>id you look upon that oeoasion?
Yes. — ^Was any appUeation made to the maids^rant abont it? I eould not find it;
I came down stahrt, and he came with me; I spoke to tibe maidservant about it. — I
l)eU«Te yon went into the room where Mr. Sterens was ? Yes. — Did ^ou tell Mr. Stevens
what was the result of yonr search? Yes; that I could not find it. — Palmer went in
with you, I believe ? Yes. — ^What passed upon the subject of the betting-book? I do
not recollect the remarks distinctly. — That evening, when you had sent the maid-
servant in to speak to Mr. Palmer on the subject of the women laying out the body,
you went down stairs you say ; how long were you absent before you returned to the
room ? Two or tlffee minutes^ not more.

Lord Campbell. — In the consultation which you three medical men had on Tuesday
night, was anything said about the symptoms which had occurred the night before ; the
spasms of the night before ? No.

Cross-examined by Mr. Serjeant Shee,

You stated that you were a medical practitioner at Lutterworth ; you said how many
years yon bad been ia practice ? About fifteen years. — You pursue the profession se-
rionsly as a means of livmg ; is that so ? Yes* — And I presume are a regularly educated
medical man ? Yes. — ^A surgeon, a member of the College of Surgeons ? I am a licen-
tiate of the Apothecaries' Company. — You did when you were a younger man, and have
done since, endeavour to qualify yourself for the practice of your profession ? Certainly.
—As to Mr. Cook, he lived a good deal at your house ? He did lately. — His health, you
say, was pretty good ? Pretty fair. — You know he had been ill, do you not ? He had
occasionally had a slight illness. — ^Did you know that he had been under treatment by
Dr. Sav|ige for some time ? Yes. — You knew he had treated himself a good deal wim
mercurial treatment ? No, not a great deal. — Did you know that he had had for a con-
mderable time a sore throat ? Yes. — ^How long had he had that ? Two or three months.
— At that time was it very bad ? In the summer it was bad. — Was it bad to the extent
of being ulcerated ? It was slightly ulcerated ; not a very extreme case ; the back part
of the tongue. — Was it so ulcerated as to make it troublesome to him sometimes to
swallow ? Noy he eould swallow ; it gave him a little pain occasionally. — It depended a
good deal, I suppose, upon what he did swallow ? Yes.~Did you know of his having
found it necessary to apply oau&tio to bis tongue ? I knew he did do it and had it done.
• — How long before his death had you known him to do that? For two months he had
ceased to do it^ — ^After he had ceased to do thai, did he complain of occasional pain in
his throat ? No. — ^Nor his tongue ? No. — Had you seen much of him during those two
months ? Not a good deal ; occasionally. — ^He came and stayed two or three days at a
time ? Yes. — Attending almost all the races, I believe ? Most of the races. — Was he
apprehensive about some spots which appeared upon his body? I never heard him
mention it. — Did he ever express any apprehension of his being afi^cted by secondary
symptoms of venereal disease ? Yes. — Were his habits, as far as you knew them, such as
to make it probable that that might be a well-grounded apprehension B His habits were
correct, generally speaking, though he may have occasionally gone astray. — They were
generally correct, but he sometimes indulged himself? Yes. — And perhaps was not very
particular ? No. — ^Do not you know that he had a chancre at the time he died ? No. —
I do not apprehend you knew at the time he died he had one, but do not you know now ?
Twelve months ago he had, I believe. — Do not you now know that when he died he had a
chancre on the penis ? I was not aware of it. — You were not aware of it till I mentioned
it ? No. — ^Were you present at either of the post-mortem examinations? No. — ^Was he
much reduced in circumstances, to your knowledge, at the time he died ? Yes, he had
been before, but he was rather redeeming his position I understood ; he told me so. —
That was by racing? Yes.— You had, probably, no accurate knowledge of his af&irs?
No. — You knew he was constantly in want of small sums of money, did not you ? No ;
he never told me that.— And you did not observe it ? I did not.— What horses had he ?
Polestar was one ; that was the principal horse : I did not know much about his racing
matters.— Do you know if he had several horses ? I know he had several.— Do you

s 2

68 TRIAL OF WILLIAM PALMER.

know if he bad any in which he was a joint owner with Palmer ? I know he had one. —
Was that a mare which was under the care of Saunders the trainer ? Yes. — Pereine T
Yes. — You were at the races with him at Shrewsbury ? Yes. — I presume he was very
anxious before that race came on ? Of course he was.«-Yott knew it wm a case^ so to
speak, of life and death to him, or of great importance to him? Of g^eat importance to
him.— Did you observe on the race-course, before the race was run, he was very anxious
and excited ? He was very excited after the race was run ; I did mjt observe any thifig
extra before that. — You say he was very excited ? Yes. — You are not a racing man
yourself? No. — ^You have been at races, I suppose ? Yes. — Was there anything remark-
able about his manner ? He was very excited, and for two cr three minutes he could not
speak to me. — And elated and happy the rest of the evening? Yes. — I suppose he drank
freely and enjoyed himself? — No; he was a temperate man.-— On that Tuesday? He
was not at all intoxicated. — ^You went away that evening ? Yes.-— The next you heard of
him was from the letter of Palmer? Yes. — I suppose Palmer knew very well who you
were, and that you were in practice in Lutterworth ? Yes. — You saw him on the after-
noon of Tuesday and consulted about the pills, and he objected to taking the morphia
pills? Yes. — ^Did he state why he objected? Because they made him ill. — Did he state
anything about Dr. Savage having recommended him not to take pills ? He said Dr.
Savage recommended him not to take calomel. — ^Did he say anything about Dr. Savage
having recommended him not to take morphia as well as calomel? Not to take opium,
he said. — I presume the effect of morphia would be to make him sleepy ? To soothe him.
— ^And enable him to take his rest ? Yes. — Would it also have the effect of constipating
his bowels ? Opium would to a slight degree. — During the morning you said that he was
better and sat up, and that he was very cheerfal ? In the afternoon ; he did not sit long ;
a very short time. — When he was first attacked that night, after you had got to bed and
were roused up, and when Palmer came, did he say, ** Palmer, give me the remedy" ?
Yes, which he had given the night before. — ** The remedy you gave me the night before" 7
Yes. — ^About how long were you rubbing his neck ; five minutes? I should think five
minutes. — You say, after Mr. Palmer gave him the two last pills he desired you to raise
him lest he should be suffocated, and then to turn him over; after he was turned over
how many minutes elapsed before his death? Three or four minutes, I should say.— ^He
died, you say, very quietly? Very quietly ; I could hardly tell when he did die. — Was
it from the time you put your fece to his heart ? Yes. — From that time he was composed
and died quietly ? Yes. — You knew very well what tetanus was, did not you? Yes; I
had seen cases before. — Yon said nothing about tetanus at the inquest? Yes, I did. — You
did not state anything about tetanus, did you? Yes; if you refer to my depositions you
will find it, I think ; convulsions and tetanus. — Did not you say you could not tdl the
cause ; you imagined at the time it was from over-excitement ? Yes ; I could not imagine
what the cause was. — Did not you say at the time it was from over-excitement he died 2
I could not tell the cause ; 1 was taken so much by surprise. — Did you say you had no
idea of the cause of death ? I did.

Mr. Attorney-General. — I think I ought to set this right : I have the deposition here
before me : "I never saw symptoms so strong as those I witnessed ; they were strong
symptoms ; " and then the man has written something which he evidently did not under-
stand, and he has put " compression ; " he has scratched that out, then " tetinus ; " and
he has scratched that out, and put " violent convulsion,"

Mr. Baron Alderson. — This is spelt " tetinus."

Mr. Attorney-General, — Yes, my Lord.

Mr. Serjeant Shee. — Whatever you said about " violent convulsions," did you say, ** I
could not tell the cause ; I imagined at the time it was from over-excitement " ? 'Yes.

Lord Campbell. — You really cannot ask him as to the contents of the deposition.

Mr. Serjeant Shee,— I only do it to save time.

Mr. Attorney-General. — If there is any doubt as to his having said the same thing there,
I had rather have it read.

Mr. Serjeant Shee. — Was it read over to you before you signed it ? Yes. — Did you
read it before you signed it? I think not, as far as I recollect; I well remember using
the word tetanus. — ^Did you take it sheet by sheet, and sign each sheet ? You will find
my signature to it, I suppose. — Did you put the pen to it at all besides signing it? I put
my name to it, that was all.

{ITie deposition of the witness was read.)

Mr. Serjeant Shee. — There is one thing in this deposition which I will call your attention
to : I see in the deposition you say, " I had been in bed a quarter of an hour or twenty mi-
nutes :" your impression to-day is ten minutes ; was not It as much as twenty minutes? I do

SECOKD DAT, MAT 15, IdSS. 69

not think it 'wa&r--Aid yon b^^nn to dose, yoonelf ? No, I had not — Ton remember the
last scream, when he fell over after having the pills ; have you at any time stated that yoa
thought he died of epilepay ? I do not recollect that I have stated so : I could not imagine
what the fit vas at the time ; Mr. Bamford said it was apoplexy ; I said it was not — ^ ben
Mr. Bamford said it was apoplezy, you said yoa thought it was not ; you could not make up
your mind what sort of fit it was? I could not. — ^Was not it your impression at one
time, and did yoa aot say, it was an epileptic fit ? I said it was more like an epileptic fit
than apoplexy. — ^I bdieve there are some sorts of epileptical attacks where the patient does
not lose his coDsdoosneas ? They generally lose consciousness. — ^There are e^eptical
forms of convolnon in wlueh the mind does continue unaffeoted, are there not? I never
met with one. — ^Tou know, as a man of science, do not you ? I cannot recal one. — ^It is
always so in hysteria, is not it? Yes, it is frequently so. — Did you kuow anything of
Mr. Pratt ? No. — Do you know that you brought Cook a letter from Mr. Pratt, from
Lutterworth ? Yes. — ^Do you know what the contents of that letter were ?

Mr. Attorney-General, — Do not state what they were ; that will appear from the letter
itself. They were matters in which I never was mixed up.

Mr. Serjeant Shee. — ^Did it produce any effect upon him when he read it ? He did not
read it; he said, " 1 know the contents of it; let it be till to-morrow morning." — Did he
seem to be put out by it ? No. — Had yon an opportunity while you were at Rugeley of
knowing anything of tiie sort of racing establishment Palmer had there ? Very little. —
Did yon go into his paddocks ? Yes. — Did you see a good many mares there r Yea,—
Some with foals ? Yes, he showed them to me. — Did it appear to you to be an expensive
establishment as far as it went? Yes. — Valuable-looking horses? Yes.— Good stables?
It was a good-looking establishment

Re-examined by Mr. Attorney^QeneraL

I suppose you have not much acquaintance with race-horses ? Not at all ; not
race-horses, — You were asked about the mare called Pereine, in which they had a part-
nership ; do you happen to know whether that partnership had been discontinued, and
Pereine had become Palmer's own ? I recollect the circumstances. — Do you recollect
how it was ? Cook told me they had tossed up for it, and Palmer had won it ; and ho
said he had won a loss. — How long was that before Cook's death? Some months. — Pole-
star was Cook's property? Yes. — You were asked whether he had at any time a
■chancre ; you said, yes : how long was that before his death ? Twelvemonths ago. — ^Did
you attend him for that ? I did. — ^This sore throat which you are speaking of, did you
attend him for that ? Sometimes, when he was at home. — You were asked whether you
had seen other cases of tetanus, and you say you bad of tromatic tetanus ; how many do
you think you have seen ? I have only seen one. — Was that from a wound ? From a
wound ; a wound on the thumb. — Did it end in death ? Yes. — How long w^s the patient
in dying from the time he received the wound? Three days. — Were the convulsions
there as severe as those you have spoken to ? No. — What was the principal spasmodic
action ; I suppose ihe locking of the jaw ? Yes. — The patient died of lock-jaw ? Yes, of
muscular convulsion. — ^Something was said after the death about apoplexy, I understand
you ? Yes, by Mr. Bamford. — Did he say after the death, he thought it was apoplexy ?
Yes. — Upon that, if I understand you, you said it was more like epilepsy ? Ye8.---Had
you ever seen cases of epilepsy ? Yes. — Are there any such symptoms in epileptic fits
XLS those convulsive spasms of the muscles ? No, the consciousness is lost. — ^And there is
none of this rigidity of the muscles? No, it is dissimilar. — How is it with regard to con-
sciousness in apoplexy? That is generally lost too. — Therefore, when Dr. Bamford
.said it was apoplexy, you contradicted it ? I did. — Are you satisfied that in this case it
was not apoplexy ? Yes, in my own mind.

Mr. Serjeant Shee. — I do not know whether vour Lordship has this upon your notes ;
there was a little confusion at the time : " I thought the sore throat was venereol, and
several other medical men did, as Cook told me."

Mr. Attomey-Qeneral, — I think what he said was, " I considered the sore throat venereal,
and several other medical men thought so too, as Cook told me." Yes, that was it.

Mr. Serjeant Shee, — I did not hear it myself.

Lord Cabipbeuu — Supposing he had any secondary symptoms of syphiHs, do you
think that they could have produced the symptoms vou saw on the Tuesday night ? No,
I say not, decidedly, and for two months before death he was clear ot them, and the
throat was well.

^ Mr. Serjeant Shee, — Will your Lordship allow me to ask a question of one of the
witnesses who is sitting there — it is Lavinia Barnes — whether on Monday morning Cook

70 TRIAL OF WILUAM PALMER.

did aot lay he had been Tery ill on SoBday ni^ jast befoK 12, and had .rung the bell
ibr aone one to eome, but he thought they were aU^ne to bed ?
Lofd OAHPBKix.~She had better be recalled.

LAVINIA BARNES called agaia.

Mr. JEkryeant Shee. — Cki Monday morning did Cook aay to you he had been Tery ill <xi
Sosday night juat before 12 o'clock, and had rung the bell far sone one to come to ban,
bnt ht thought yoa had all gone to bed ? Yea, h£ did; he did net aay he had rung the
bell, he waa near ringing the belL

Mr. AUoTMy^eneral. — ^Did he tell yon what it was that had aUumed him ? No.

ELIZABETH MILLS recalled.

Mr. Attomey-GeneraL — Do you recollect when you went into Cook's roam, on the
Monday morning hia telling you about his having been disturbed in the night ? Yes. — >
Tell ua what he said. '* I i^aa just mad for two minutes/' he said. — ^Was that in answer
to any question you put to him r No.

Lord Campbeix. — How did he come to say that ? I waa asking him how he was.

Mr. Attomey^Q^neriML — I asked you if you had put any question to him ; you asked
hin (how he was ; what did he tell you ? He ** was jsst mad for tw<o minutes ; " I said,
" Why did not you ring the bell ?" — BefM« you asked him why he did not ring the bell
did he tell you what had occasioned Uiia feeling of his for two minutes 2 No, I believe
not ; I said, " Why did not you ring the -bell ? " he said, ^ I thought you wonld be all
&8t asleep and net hear it."*>-Reeollect yourself for a mwoient; did he teU you of any-
thing having happened in the street ? Yes. — Was that at the same time he told you he
had been just mad for two minutes ? It was at that time. — What did he say ? I asked
him why he did not ring the bell. — Y<m say something about the street; when did he say
that ? I believe after we had spoken about ringing the belL — After you had asked him
about ringing the beil ? He said he thought we should all be fast asle^, and it passed
oyer, and he tried to manage without us, without calling us up.

Lord Campbell. — What did he say about the street? He said he thought he was
disturbed by hearing a quarrel in the street. — Did Jbe say what effect that had had upon
him, the quaxrel in the street ? No, nothing more. — Was that all he said, or was there
anything more ? Thast is all I can remember. — Try and recottect ; did he aay how the
noise in the street had affected him ? He was not sure that it was thaX which had made
him ill ; that he might have been asleep, and t^e quarrel might have disturbed him. —
Did he aay so ? I cannot positively reeolleet whether he said so or not.

HENRY SAVAGE, M.D., sworn.— Examined by Mr. Attorney-General.

I believe you are a physician, living at 7, Gloucester-place? — Yes, I am. — Did you
know the deceased man. Cook ? Yes, very well, during the past year. — How long had
you known him ? About four years. — Was he in the habit of consulting you profession-
ally from time to time ? Yes, during the last four years. — We have heard that he was
not a man of robust constitution ? No, he was not robust — ^What was his general health
during the time you had known him ? Good for a man who was not robust. — Had you
reason to think at all that he was of a pulmonary disposition ? I only suspected that
from his complaining of his throat; his throat induced me to examine his chest with that
view. — Did he come to you in the month of May in 1855 ? He came to me in the
month of May ; I saw him just before ; I saw him early in the spring ; ' and 1 saw
him late in the autumn, about November, 1854. — What did you see mm in November,
1854, for? Simple indigestion : when he came to town, if he felt a little out of order,
he used to call upon me. — In the spring of 1855, what did he come to you for? The
old afiBeiir of indigestion was one subject of complaint, but he was anxious particularly
about some slight spots about the skin ; one or two only. — Where w«Te tiiey ? One on
his arm and one on his forehead. — Had he any ulceration on the moirnh ? Yes, he had
two shallow ulcers on the tongue corresponding to bad teeth. — Bad teeth will. occasion-
ally prodaoe ulceration in the mouth ? Yes. — ^Did you learn from him %t that time that
he had been treated for those sores mercHriaUy ? He said he had been under a mild
mercurial course. — Did he apprehend that those spots and ulcerations were syphilitic?
Yes, he apprehended they were what he called secondaiy symptoms. — You, 1 believe,
were of a different opinion ? Yes ; I thought they were not. — Was he at that tinae
going on with this mild mercurial course ? I think up to a day or two before he saw
me he had taken mercury in some form. — Did you recommend its disconjtinnance ? Its
immediate discontinuance. — What did you give him ? Quinine as a tonic, and an ape-
*«ent containing cream of tartar, magnesia, and •sulphur. How long did he eontinue to
that?

SEOOHD DAT, If at 15, 1856. 71

Loid Campboju — I mppose tlie extet iagwdientB are iM>t important ?

Mr. Attorney-General, — It may be of importance, from what I tinderstand t yon gaTe
him qninine as a tonic, and, as an aperient, cream of tartar, salphnr, and magnesia?
Yes. — Did you at any time give him antimony ? No, not at any time— Under that
treatment which yon prescribed, did those sores gradually disappear? They were quite
well by Ae end, of May. — Did he, nevertheless, continue to come to you afterwards
from time to time ? Yes; I saw him very frequently in June^ — ^What did he come to
you in June for? Still feeling some little anxiety about the correctness of my notions of
ids not having syphilis, if he saw a spot he would come to make sure I was correct in
my notioiis.— I rappoie yon too were anxious ? Yes ; I felt there was Mme diliiBBence
of opinion betw«en nw and tiw medical man in the aountry , and therefore I was particii-
larly anzioua to see whether my treatment was oorrect. — Supposing you had been wrong,
the^coBsequenoes might have l>een serious ? It would have been duoiaging to my reputa-
tioa and injurious to him. — ^Did yoa examine him from time to time, and attend to see
that those symptoms did not return ? Whenever he came I examined him carefuUy;'^
Was your attention directed to his throat ? Yes.< — Was there anything the matter with
it? He never had the least ulceration of the throat.— Was there anything the matter
with the throat ? One of his toosiis was dighUy enlarged ; there was very little tonsil
upon one side, and a very large one on the other ; it was red and tender. — It was^ in your
judgment, one of those cases of diseased tonsil to which any body may be suliject? I
thought so. — ^Was there anything of a syphilitic character in the appearance of the
throat? No. — He continued under your treatment till when? Till a fortnight before
his 'death. — ^Did you see him a fortnight before his death? I saw him on the dth of
November; either the ard or the 5th, I am not quite sure which; I saw him on the
2dth of October, and about a week afterwards. — Did yoa examine him on those occa^
sions? On the 29th of October and the 3rd or 5th of November I examined him
particularly, because I thought he was going away. — Did you recommend him to go
away? I recommended him to go abroad:^ I dwelt on tlie pulmonary symptoms: I
thought under the left Inng there was an indication of pulmonary affection ; subsequently
that rather disappeared: i nevertheless dwelt on the symptoms, as afiording a good
excuse to get him away. — You wished to got him away from his turf associations ? - Yes.
— You wished him to go abroad? Yes, for two years. — Upon that occasion did you
carefully examine him ? I did. — I believe you did not confine your examination upon
those occasions to the upper parts of the body ? No ; as it was an open question as to
secondary symptoms, I examined his penis. — You examined those parts where that
disease would primarily show itself? Yes. — Was there anything venereal about him ?
I thought not : there was a very shallow scar, indeed, of some former excoriation, to
wbich he told me he was liable ; he generally got rid of them. — In your judgment, there
was nothing venereal about him at that time ? No. — No chancre ? Certainly not — Nor
any sore in any other part of his body ? N^o. — And that you saw was the case up to
within a fortnight of his death ? Yes.

Cross-examined by Mr. Serjeant 8hee,

He was strongly in iavour of mercury himself, was not he ? No ; I do not think he
was in favour of mercury ; but he was a weak man, and very apt to take the advice of
any person he might be m company with.— A man who would take a ^uack medicine, I
suppose ? I do not know that he woHld.^~A man Who would be likely to do that ? No ;
I think he bsKl a little larare sense than that ; he would have his throat cauterised by any
one he might be with, I mean any medical man ; he was hipped on tiie Ru1*oect of his throat.
— I understand you to say his throat was not quite well ; his tonsils were not quite well
the last time you<saw him ? He had a redness over one tonsil, showing there was tender-
ness ; very often delicate peoplie will have that sort of sore throat, wmch is produced by
a redness -of the membrane.«^He was not in a state that brandy-end* water pretty strong
wonld do him manh geod ? Brandy-and-water pretty strong would not do him good
under any cireumstanoes. — Had he uloeratioa on the lips? Yes; three or four very
superficial -eaes on the iips.

Lord'CdLMPiiELii. — ^When ytm last saw Mm? No; ererytliing of that sort was quite
well in May. — ^Wss there a redness of the tonsils when yeu last saw him ? There was a
slight redness of the tmiAls ; but everything else was well in May.

Mr. CHARl-ES NEWTON sworn.— Examined by Mr, James,
Wliatare you? Asfflstant to Mr. Sak, the surgeon of Hugt^leyr-Mr. Salt is aproc-
tiaing snrgeoii there ? He is: — Do yoa know WiUiam Pahner ? I do. — Do you remem-
ber. Mouday tfco l^th of ^tovember? J do.— Did vou see WiUiam Palmer on that
evening ? I dad/— Where did you see him ? At Mr. 'Salt's euri^ery .--Did he come tbere

72 TBIAL OF WILLIAM PALMER.

to you ? He came there about 9 o'clock in tbe evexuBg* — Wwe you alone yghen he oame
to you ? I was. — What did he say to. you ? He asked me for three grains of strychnia.
— ^Did he say more to you ? I weighed it accurately, and gave it to him. — In what did
you give it to him ; how did you enclose it? In a small paper.— It is a white powder, is
not it? Yes. — ^What did he say to you when you gave it him? He did not make any
remark; he said "Good night.*' — Did he take it away with him? He took it away
with him. — ^Did he pay you for it ? No ; he did not. — You say he did not pay you for
it ; did you give it to him, or sell it to him ? I gave it to him. — ^You knew him to be a
medical man ? Yes ; I did. — And you made no charge ? No charge.

Lord Campbell.— ^What would have been the charge ?< — We do not sell drugs ; we
do occasionally sell just pills, or anything of that kind ; we have not a retail shop.

Mr. James. — ^You mean, you sell medicine as apothecaries, made up ; but you would
not sell strychnia to an ordinary person coming for it ? No. — ^How long did this occupy,
his coming for the strychnia and yotr giving it him ? I do not think he was in the shop
above two minutes; just while I weighed it accurately. — ^When did you see Palmer
again ? On the 25th of November. — Did you see him on the 20th, the following day ?
Yes, the 20th of November.— Where did you see him on Tuesday the 20th? At Mr.
Hawkins's shop. — What is Mr. Hawkins; what shop does he keep? — ^A druggist's. —
About what time of the day did you see him on the Tuesday at Mr. Hawkinses shop ?
I am not quite sure about tUe time ; between 1 1 and 12 o'clock, I think. — ^In the day ?
In the daytime.— Was Hawkins's, the druggist's shop, the shop at which you dealt for
medicines and compounds ? Yes ; we have drugs from them when we are out ; we have
our drags generally from London. — ^Were you in the habit of calling in at Hawkins's
shop as you went by ? Very frequently. — Did you say that Palmer was in the shop
when you went in ? He was. — ^Did he speak to you? He did. — ^What did he say to
you? He asked me how I was, and put his hand upon my shoulder, and I went with
him to the door. — ^How came you to go to the door with him? He put his hand between
my shoulders, and said he wished to speak to me. — You went to the doo^ with him ? I
did.-^When you got to the door with him, what did he say to you ? He asked me when
Mr. Edwin ^It was going to his farm ? Did you go only to the dool*, or did you go out
into the street ? Out into the street; when we got to the door, Mr. Palmer went a httle
distance from the door. — Into the street ? Yes. — ^When you were in the street with
him, what did he say to you ? He asked me when Mr. Edwin Salt was going to his
farm ; and whilst we were talking, a person of the name of Brassington came up. — ^Was
Mr. Edwin Salt the son of Mr. Salt, your employer? He is. — ^Where was the farm
which he asked if he was going to? At Sudbury,— About how fer is that? Perhaps 14
miles ; I never was there. — Had Palmer anything to do with this farm at all ; did you
understand what he meant? It was rumoured in the town that Mr. Edwin Salt was
going. — Had Palmer anything to do with it ? Not at all. — While he was speaking,
you said something about Mr. Brassington ? Mr. Brassington came up ; Mr. Brassington,
the cooper. — Did Brassington speak to you, and enter into a conversation with you ? He
did. — While) Brassington was speaking to you, what did Palmer do? Palmer went
away. — Did you -remain in the same place where Brassington spoke to you? Yes.; Mr.
Brassington had two bills for Mr. Salt. — What was Brassington? A cooper.

Lord CAMPBELii.— What bills were they ? Bills for money.

Mr. James, — Bills he had against him ? Yes. — Bills for what he had done ? Yes ;
for work done for Mr. Salt.— Did Brassington speak to you about those bitts^ and engage
your attention ? Yes. — While Brassington was talking to you abont those bills- in t&e
street, what did Palmer do ? He left me, and went into Hawkins's shop. — He went baok
again into the shop ? Yes.-^Did you see Palmer come out of Hmrkins's shop ? ■ I did.
— When he came out of Hawkins's shop, were you still talking* to Mr. Brassingtoa! in
the street ? I was.«- Did Palmer speak to you when he came out of the shop h*^I am
not quite surte ; he went by me. I was talking with Mr. Brassington at ihe* time.''-*—
Which way did be go? Towards his own house. — How far is Uttvifkun's sh«p.fixaii
Palmer's house? About 200 yards, I should think: perhaps more; between SOOfand
SOO yards.-^After your conversaticm with Bvassington had ended, 4id you go into
Hawkins's shop ? 1 did. — ^You must not tell us what you ssud ; is< there & person of 4he
name of Roberts, an ap]^entice at Hawkins's? Yes; there is. — ^Was he in Hawkins's
shop, serving, when you went in ? He was in the shop. — You must not tell us what he
said when you went into the shop; had you some conversation with Roberts about
Palmer? Yes.— ^Do you knows man of the name of Thirlby? Ye6.<*-^DoeK Thirlby
- deal in drugs? He does. — ^Has lie ever been asastant to Palmer; is he a man.^wilio
succeeded to Palmer's business, do you kaow? He i8.«-^Had you soiae conversactioii
about Thirlby with Roberts; was Thirlby's name mentioned? It was Bot.*~Ds yoa» of

SECOND DAY, May 15, 1856. 73

your own knowledge, know wfaetker Palmer iwially dedt with • TUrlbV for drags f
Yes ; fae dispenses adl his niediaitie8.^~YoiL.mean Thirlby dispenses Palmers xbedieines ?
Yes.

Lord Campbell. — ^What do you mean by dispensing Palmer's medicines P He acts
for Mr. Palmer.

Mr. James. — If Palmer wishes to give medicines to a patient, yon mean Thirlby
makes them np? Yes. — Do you know that Thirlby has succeeded to the apothecary s
business that Palmer had ? 1 do not know whether Palmer was in praetice before I
came; I understood he had been. — At this time in November, I mean? Yes.— Do yon
remember Sunday the 25th of November? I da — ^Where wefe you abo«t seven o'dock
on that evening? At Mr. Palmer's house. — What was the cause of your going there?
I was sent for. — ^Wbo eaiue ioft you, do you remember ? I am not quite sure.^-^'You went
to Palmer's house in eonsec^nence of being sent for ? Yes. — Where did you find Palmer
when you went ? In the kitchen. — ^What was he doing ? He was reading ; sitting by
fire, reading. — ^What did he say to you ? He asked me how I was : he asked me to have
a little brandy. — ^Did you sit down and take some ? I did. — You sat down and took some
brandy ? I am not quite sure whether I did sit down.

Lord CAMPBELL.*-^Had you some brandy ? Some braudyand-waten

Mr. James. — What did he say to you ?

Lord Campbell. — ^Was there any one else present ? No, there was not.

Mr- James. — ^What did he say to you? He asked me what would be a dose of
strychnia that would kill a dog, I told him a grain ; he asked me whether it would be
found in the stomach, what would be the appearance of the stomach. — ^After death ?
Yes. — ^What did you say ? I told him there would be no inflammation, and I did not
think it would be found. — Did he make any remaik upon that? I think he said, ** It is
all right."

Lord Campbell. — ^You think he said so ? That it would be all right, as if he were
speaking to himself, and he did that {snapping his fingers).

Lord Campbbll. — Did he snap his fingers ? Yes.

Mr. James. — Did you see him do so ? Yes. — ^Did you talk about some other ordinary
matters of conversation afterwards ? Yes ; he made some other remarks. — You mean in
general casual conversation? Yes. — ^How long were you with him altogether in the
kitchen that evening, do you think ? Perhaps five minutes, or more. — ^When did you
hear that the post-mortem examination of Cook's body was to take place ? I think it was
on the 26th. — That would be the Monday, this interview being on the Sunday ? Yes.
— ^Did you go down to Mr. Bamford's, to go with him to the post-mortem examination ?
I asked Mr. Salt whether he was going ; Mr. Salt went down with me to Dr. Bamford's,
-to ask him to let me go. — When you went down to Bamford's, did yon find the prisoner
there ? Mr. Bamford was not at home, and I went with Mr. Salt down the town ia his
qigj a^d we met Mr. Bamford near the church ; Mr. Bamford asked him whether he
was going to the post-mortem, and he said he was not. — Did you afterwards see
Mr. Bamford ? Yes ; we met Mr. Bamford. — ^Did yon see Palmer, the prisoner, before
you went ? No. — ^Did you see Palmer before you went to the post-mortem examination ?
Yes ; at Mr. Bamford's house. — Where did you find Palmer; in what part of Mr. Bam-
ford's house ? In his study.

Xtord Campsbsx.^ — At what hour was this ; about what o'clock ? I am not quite
499rt^in.^-Wa8 it before breakfast or after breakfast? It was after breakfast, abo\it

10 o'iClQCk.

Mr. /omes^-H^When you saw Palmer at Bamford's did he speak to you I He did; he

asked me- what I wanted; I told him I was come to the posi>mortem.-«*Wha;t.did. be say

to ^ou theik? He asked me whether Mr. Salt was going; I told him he was ei^ged and

-eovld not! go. — iDtd you take some instruments and other tbmgs tint were neoessacy and

-go d«wii to 1^ TidbDt Arms for. the examination ? I did. — When you got there do you

remmttber findkig Dr. Harland there ? Dr* Hariand went down, with us«*-nDo you know

Mr. Frere? Yes.-+-Who is he 2 A surgeon practising in Bngeley.'—Aftwr you .had got to

ike Talbot Arms did Dr. Harland. go away for a short time and leave you and Pahpaer

togetheh^ ? - Yes.— He and the other dootors went away for a short time fund left you and

Pahner^gethenr? * Yes.-*««Where ««re you left together with Palmer? In the TaUiot

AanaiS'.4<f4ii»>wfaat room, do you remember ?< It was the eaitranee to the hall.— When you

' atidiPafaneriwere left together did he- speak to yon ? I was alone with him. — -What did

iie say> tayon? > Hesald it would be a dirty job^ he should go and have a Uttle braBd}r ;

would- 1' go and have a little with.him.^Did you go wk^- him ? I did.-^To his house ?

Yes>..^Whieh is almost opponte, I bdievBi It is opposite'. — J3id begnre you any brafldy ?

74 TRiIl of WILLIAM PALMER.

He did.— How nweh ? Two wine-g^aMes foil.— Neat brandy ? Neat braady^^rDid he
take any himsdf ? He did. — Hov much ? I think ke bad two glasses ; I saw him drink
two glasses. — While you were there at his house driuking this brandy did he say anything
to you about Cook or his body ? He did. — What did he say to you ? He said, *' You
will find this fellow suffering from diseased throat ; he has had syphilis."

Loird Campbsxl.— Were those the exact words : " You will find this fellow suffering
from diseased throat ; he has had syphilis " ? Yes ; he said he had been taking mercary
for his. tongue ; he had taken a great deal of mercury.

Mr. Jamas, — ^Did yon afterwards go over with him to the post*mortem ? I did. — And
found the other medicai men returned ? Yes ; Palmer was watching at the window. —
What was Palmer doing while the post-mortem examination went on ? He stood near
Dr. fiamford against the fire. — You were examined before the coroner? I was. — Before
the coroner you did not say anything of your having given to Palmer 3 grains of
strychnia on the night of the 19tii of November ? I did not. — When did you first atate
that to anybody ?

Mr. Serjeant Bhee, — ^Perhaps it would be right that the depontion should be read, if
my learned friend goes into it

Mr. James, — Had not you better let us complete our examination ? tMs is something
which is not in the deposition; I am showing the reason why it is not. (To the witness)
To whom did you first tell this of his having had from you S grains of strychnia on
Monday ni^^t? I told Mr. Cheshire, the postmaster. — When did you tell Cheshire?

Mr. Strjea/Kt 8h». — I think we must not have what he tokl Cheshire.

Mr. /am«9.^-*When did you first mention it to Cheshire ?

Mr. Serjeant Shee. — 1 object to that evidence ; there was one answer about it slipped
in before. What is said by this witness to Cheshire is not evidence against the prisoner.

Mr. James, — I will leave the whole of it to the cross-examination.

Cross-examined by Mr. Grove.

When did you first mention this about the 3 grains ? It was after the inquest. — How
long after the inquest ? I cannot say when. — Was it a week ago? A week since from
now do you mean ? — Yes. Yes, it was.

Lord Campbell. — How long after the inquest ? I cannot tell how long ; it might
have been a week after the inquest, or it might have been two or three days; I am not
quite sure.

Mr. throve. — ^Might it have been a fortnight ? I should thiidc not.— Can you laidertalie
to say it was less l£an a fortnight? Yes, I think I can. — Were you after the inquest
examined on behalf of the Crown ? Before the inquest. — After the inquest were you
examined for the purpose of giving evidence on behalf of the Crown ? Yes, I was.—
When ? It was some time after. — How long aftor ? I really cannot undertake to say ; it
was idfter the inquest — I do not want you to name the day or the week ; how k)ng after ?

Lord Cahpbell. — Was it before or af^ what you had mentioned to Cheshire ? It
was after then.

Mr. Orove. — ^How long after what you had naentioned to Cheshire? I cannot undertake
to say. — Can you tell me whether it was a fortnight, a week, or a month ? I do not
know. — Cannot you name within a month the time when you were first examined for the
purpose of giving evidence for the Crown ? I do not know, and I cannot say. — When
you were first examined for this purpose, did you say anything about the purclase of the
three grains of strychnia? No, I did not. — When you were nrst examined on behalf of
the Crown, did you mention the oircmnstanee of the conversation about a dog~-*poisoning
a dog ? Yes, I did. — Was tbat the first time you had mentioned that oonversation ?* No,
it was not ; I had mentioned k to Mr. Salt.^ — When did you mention that to Jtfr. Salt? I
cannot say what timeit was I mentioned it.— On you tell me it within a mimth ? I can-
not: I cannot -rememiber the. particulars. — -How many different exMoini^ons hwwe'joa
given for Che parpose of your evidence here ? One ; twice I hxve been exaaunedk ; I
gave a statement ta Mr* Gaidkier. — Was that be&ro tl^ inquest f 3R^, it waa not.-^Aiber
the inqoest ? Yes. — ^Howsoon afber ? it was aome tane aflter.^^Wihat time ? I oannet
say precisely.--*I>id you mention to him the matter abont the dog at that time ? Yes, I
did. — Did you meaitian to Isim 1^ malter about the thice gminS'Of strychnia ? No, I did
not.-^You were exanrined at the inquest, I think you inve stated.; 4id yoa^sa^r «nytfaEii^
at the inquest either abo«t oowersatami with reject to the ik^, or wsth resyect to the
three grains of strychDUi 9 No, 2 did nstj— 'Did ^u say anything About (he ooanrecsation
of Cook's suffering fnom diseased thfDSt-^^yphilis ? Y-ea, I dtid.>^t the mquestf 'No, I
did net ; . i was not questioned aiboat the post-mortem at ^dl.

SECOND DAT, Hay 15, 1856. 75

Iiord Campbell. — ^Were yo* ezamined before the ooroBer about Palmer's going to
Hawkins's shop ? I was.

Mr. Grove. — I beliere yon did give evidence of your conversation with Palmer at the
door of Mr. Hawkins's ? I did. — Did yon then hear that he had purchased, or was alleged
to have paichased, strychnia at Hawkins's shop ? Of conne I did, or I should not have
told it. — You knew diat your evidence bore reference to a purchase of strychnia ? Mr.
(xardiner^s clerk came to me. — ^Did yoa know that your evidence with reference to the
conversation at Hawkins's shop bore ap<m the purchase of strychnia at that shop ? After
Roberts had given his evidence, Mr. Gardiner sent his clerk to me. — ^I want yoa to tell
me whether, at the time yon gave the evidence before the coroner of your conversatioa
at Hawkins's shop, yoa knew it was with reference to the purchase of strychnia? After
Soberts had given his statement, Mr. Gardiner's clerk came to me.

Lord Campbell. — ^Did you know that your evidence was with reference to the sup-
posed circumstance of strychnia being bought at Hawkins's shop ? Yes, I did.

Mr. Gnee, — ^You staled, I beHeve, before the coroner that the strychnine was purchased
on the Satorday ? Ko, I did not. — ^Was wliat you stated taken down in writing ? It was.
— ^Was it read over to you } It was.— Did yoa sign it ? I did.

(l%e deposHwn of the witness was read,)

Mr. Gfrove. — I ought to say that it has been miseopied in all our copies. (7b tTie witness')
When did you first give evidence, or give a copy of what you could say, to the Crown
with reference to the purchase of the three jzrains on Monday ? On Tuesday. — On
Tuesday last ? Yes.— You have told us that Palmer said, " You will find this fellow
suffering from diseased throat :" when you gave your evidence to the Crown, did not you
say he stated, '* You will find Uiis poor fellow suffering" ? I do not know whether I said
poor or rich. — Can you tell me that ^ou did not say, when you gave an aooount of this
conver6ati<» which was taken down in writing, that Palmer's expression was, *' You will
find this poor fellow suffering firom diseased throat " ? I cannot remember whether he
used the expression ** poor." — You know there is a difference in the expression " poor
fijllow" and "fellow"? I know there is a difference between " poor " and "rich:" I
cannot say what I do not recollect. — Can you say now which he said? No, I cannot. —
I think you have told us you were at the ix)st-mortem examination ? I was. — Did you
point out the chancre to the jDftedical men there ? No, I did not. — ^Did you point out any-
tiling upon the penis of the 'deceased ? No, I do not think I did. — Cannot you give me a
more certain tmswev than that? I do not think I did make any remark about it. — Cannot
yon tell me whether you did call attention to that or not ? No, I do not think I chd : I
do not recollect it. — ^x on can go no further than '* I do not think I did " ? I do not recol-
lect. — Can you tell me whether you mentioned it to Dr. Harland ? No, I did not, to the
best of my knowledge. — Did you mention it to any medical man ? I do not think I made
any remark about his penis at all. — Did you point it out ? No. — Was it noticed in your
presence? It was not examined. — Was it noticed there in your presence? 1 do not
recollect any remark being made about it. — Did you yourself see it ? Yes, I did.

Lord Campbell. — What did you see ? The penis. — What did you see ? It looked
to be healthy.

Mr. Grove. — Did you see a chancre, or the marks of one ? No, I did not. — Can you
tell me the distance of Dr. Bamford's house from the Talbot Arms ? I should think it
may be more than 100 yards from Dr. Bamford's house to Mr. Palmer's.

Be-examined by Mr. Attorney-General,

You have said that you gave information to the Crown about this fact of the three
grains of strychnia <m Tuesday? Yes. — How was it you did not give that information
before ? On acoonnt that Mr. Palmer had not been friends with Mr. Salt ; they never
speak to each other.— What had that to do with it? I thought Mr. Salt would be dis-
ideased at my letting him have anything. — Yon say they did |iot spesdL ? No ; Mr.
Thirlby lived with Mr. Salt for 19 years. — Was it in ounseqoence of Mr. Thirlby going
to Palmer's that this dofferenoe took place between Mr. Palmer jmd Mr. Salt ? Y«6 ;
Mr. Salt did not spea^ to Mr. Palmerj or Mr. Thirlby either.— Was there any other
reason besides that Oor your kee^ag it back ? That was my only neason. — ^To whom did
yoa first cooimnnioate it ; you conmuuicated it first, you say, to Cheshire the post*
master ? Yes.— On Tuesday last, when you first came and consnunioated it to the Crowa,
dad any one suggest to you t» do so, or did you do it of your own accord ? I did it
vohiatarily.-^No one advised you <o do it? No; I thought it my duty to do it. — ^To
whoaa did yon aeatioQ it first «m Tueaday ? To Mr. Boyeott.— That is a derk of Mr.
Gardioer^ Yes.— W<bere*did you see Inm? At the Rogeley staiion.— Were you then
coaing up to London? I was.**-* Yoa were at the statian for the. purpose of comiB^'iq[>

76 TRIAL OF WILLIAM PALMER.

to London ? Yes ; I met all the witnesses there. — The witnesses were assembled there
coming up to London for the trial? Yes. — You saw Boycott? Yes, I saw Boycot, and
I went to him. — What did yoa tell Boycott? I asked him whether I could see Mr.
Gardiner when 1 came np.

Lord Campbell. — Were you coming up to attend as a witness at the trial at that
time ? Yes ; I was subpoenaed, and was coming np by the same train.*

Mr. Attorney -General, — You had your subpcena, and were coming up with the other
witnesses? Yes; by the 15 minutes past eight traiti from Rageley.— Did yon tell
Boycott what you wanted to see Mr. Gardiner for? Yes, I did. — ^What did he do ; did he
bring you to Mr. Gardiner? He did.— Where was Mr. Gardiner? In London. — As soon
as you arrived in London Mr. Boycott brought you to Mr, Gardiner, did he ? Yes. — Then,
I believe, you were brought to this gentleman, the Solicitor for the Treasury ? Yes. —
And you made your statement to him? I did. — In the mean time, I presume, you had
communicated to Mr. Gardiner what you had to say ? I had.

Mr. Serjeant SKee. — ^Will your Lordship ask this witness whether he has &ot ^ven
another reason ; the reason being that he was afraid he. should be indicted for peijnry ?
Yes, I did ; I did not give it as a reason; I mentioned it to the gentleman sitting there
(Mr. Greenwood), I did not give it as a reason ; I stated what I hsucL heard about a young
man from Wolverhampton whom Mr. George Palmer had indicted for perjury because
this young man could not produce a book to show that he had sold him some prussic
acid. — In what case was that ? Upon the inquest upon Walter Palmer.

Lord Campbell. — You were asked whether you had not given some reason ? 1 did
not give it as a reason.

Mr. Attomeif-General, — ^What was it you stated ? I stated about this young man from
Wolverhampton.— Tell us what you said. I told him ibout this young man from Wol-
verhampton. — What did you tell him ? I had heard in Rugeley of the young man being
indicted for perjury. — That he had been indicted, or that they had threatened to indict
him ? That he was threatened to be indicted.— By whom ? By George Palmer. — That
is the brother of William ? Yes ; because he had sold the prisoner prussic acid. — Because
he had said so at the inquest ; had this young man said at the inquest that he had sold
prussic acid? Yes.— At what inquest? On Walter Palmer; and he did not enter it in
the book, so that he could not prove it. — ^Did you mention at that time, in your conversa-
tion, what George Palmer had said he would do with him ? That he would transport
Ixlm.— Did you enter this three grains of strychnia in any book ? No, I did not.

. Mr. Serjeant 8hee* — Will your Lordship ask him whether the inquiry into the cir-
-cnmstances of the death of Walter Palmer did not take place five or six weeks after the
inquest upon the body of Cook ? That was not my reason for saying it. — Did it take
place five or six weeks after ? Yes.

Mr. Attomey-GeneraL-^Y^as it after the inquest on Walter Palmer you were first
examined on the part of the Crown ? Yes, it was.

Adjourned to to-morrow at 10 o* clock.

THIED DAY'S TEIAL.

Mat 16, 1856.

CHARLES JOSEPH ROBERTS sworn.— Examined by Mr. James.
In November last were you an apprentice to Mr. Hawkins a druggist at Rugeley?
Yes. — Do you know the prisoner William Palmer ? Yes. — Do you remember Tuesday
the 20th of November? Yes.— Did you see the prisoner on that day? Yes. — Where
<lid you see him ? He came into Mr. Hawkins's shop. — About what time ? I believe it
was between' eleven and twelve o'clock in the day. — Did he sav anything to you when he
came ? Yes. — What did he say ? He asked first for two drachms of prussic acid. —
Did he bring anything with him ? He brought a bottle for it — What did you do then ?
I was putting it up for him, when Mr. Newton, the assistant to Mr. Salt, came into the
shop. — Did Palmer speak to Newton ? Yes, he did. — ^Do you remember what he said to
him ? He told him he wanted to speak to him. — Palmer said he wanted to speak to him?
Yes, and they went out of the shop together. — PiJmer and Newton ? Yes.-^Do you
know a person of the name of Brassington, a co<^er ? Yes. — ^After Palmer had gone out
of your shop did you see Brassington the cooper ? Yes, he took Newton away from
Palmer. — You saw that? Yes. — Did he get into conversation with him? Ye8.-*Can

THIRD DAT, Hat 16, 1856. 77

yoa see from, the shop viiidov into the street ? Tes.— From tibe shop ? Tes. — You caa
clearly ? Yes. — -Now, vhen Bras^gton took Newton away with luxn in couTersatiou,
what did Palmer do ? He came back again into the shop.

Lord Cabipbell. — ^What were you doing when Palmer came back ? I was putting
the prossic acid into the bottle.

Mr. James. — You were in the act of putting up the pmssic acid ; what did he say to
you ? He asked for six grains of strychnine. — Anything more ? And two drachms of
Batley*s solution of opium. — ^Is that what is commoidy called Batley's sedative ? Yes. —
Now while you were patting up these preparations for the prisoner, did you observe
where he was standing ? Yes.

Lord Campbell. — ^What became of the pmssic acid ? That remained on the counter
while I was putting up the other.

Mr. James. — ^You had put up the pmssic acid ready for him, and then he asked for
the six grains of strychnine and the Batley's sedative ? Yes.

Mr. Justice Cresswell. — -And you placed the pmssic acid on the counter ? Yes.

Mr. James, — Were you behind the counter preparing these things ? Yes, — While you

were behind the counter preparing these things for the prisoner, did you observe where

he 'Wis standing ? At the shop-door. — Now, when he ordered these thin^ of you, when

he returned into the shop, did he order them at the counter ? Yes, he did. — While you

were preparing them, was it then he moved from the counter to the street door ? Yes. —

Which way was he looking while he was standing at the street-door? I do not know. — •

I do not mean vrhich way was he looking into the street, but with his back to yon. Yes.

—That is what I mean, looking with his back to you into the street, standing in the

door-way ? Yes. — How long do you suppose you took in the preparation of these thines

for him before you delivered them to him ? About five minutes. — ^Did he remam

standing at the door until you were ready to give him the things? Yes. — Did you then

deliver the things to him ? Yes, I did. — That is, the pmssic acid in the bottle which he

bad brought? Yes. — How was the strychnine delivered ? In a pajler.

Lord CA3CPBELL — ^The quantity you spoke of? Yes.

Mr. James. — Six grains and the Batley's solution of opium, the sedative? Yes. — ^In
a phial ? Yes. — Did he take them away ? Yes. — Did he pay vou for them ? Yes. — •
Now, from the time that Mr. Palmer returned to your shop after he left Mr. Newton,
and from the time you delivered him these things, was there any other person in the
shop ? No. — ^Now, after the prisoner had left v^rith these things, did Mr. Newton come
into your shop ? Yes, he did. — You must not tell us what he said to you or you to him,
hut had you some conversation about Palmer's purchasing these things ; do not say what ?

Mr. Serjeant Shee. — We ought not to have what it is about at all.

Mr, James, — Had you some conversation with him ? Yes, I had, — Did he make some
remark to you; do not tell us what it was? Yes, he did. — You say you had known
Pahner for some time ; how long had you been previously to that November in Mr. Haw-
kins's employment ? Six years.— Now, before this, how long was it since the prisoner had
ever bought any drugs at your shop, before this date on the 20th of November ? About
two years. — Not for two years before ? No.— Do you know Mr. Thirlby ? Yes.— Thirlby
^as his assistant, we hear ? Yes.— Had he started a chemist's shop ? Yes, he had. —
Thirlby had been assistant to Mr. Palmer, and he had opened a, chemist's shop? Yes.—
About two years before^ Yes. — And since that date he had never bought any drugs of
you until this Tuesday ? I had not sold him any. — Not to your knowledge ? No,

Lord Campbell. — Thirlby was still carrying on the business at that time ? Yes.

Mr. Jam^s.— Besides having a cheniist's shop is Thirlby practising as an apothecary
or dispensing medicines? Yes, I believe he is, m Palmer's name.

Cross-examined by Mr. Serjeant Sliee,

I presume you madie an entry in your book ? No.

The Aff&rnisy^Oenet€U,^J)o you make entries where you take ready money across the
counter? • No.

Lord Campbell.— Did you make an entry of this pmssic acid or sedative? No.—
You did not make an entry of any of these things ? No.

The ^f^o;7iffy-(?e»era?.—-You were asked, when articles are obtained over the counter, do
you make an entry ; is it your habit to make an entry of them in your book ? No.

The AitomeyrO.eneraly-^l should state that in the course of the proofs we had intended
to offer we shpuid have called Mr. Bamfoi-d, but he is aeriousjy iU> and we are obliged
to postpone him until to-morn>w«

78 TRIAL OF WILLUM PALMER.

Mr. JatiKs.^'We sliaU very likely have to read his depo^on to-morrow.

WILLIAM VERNON" STEVENS sworn.— Examined by the Attome^'General,

I believe you are a merchant living in the City ? I am in no business now; I have
retired from business. — You were the step-father of the deceased Mr. John Parsons
Cook ? I was. — You married his father's widow ? I did. — How long ago is it since yon
married the father's widow ? Eighteen years. — And you have known the young man
intimately ever since, I presume ? Ever since that.

Lord Campbell. — Did he reside with you ? No, my Lord, he did not reside very
generally with me; some years after I was made an executor under the paternal grand-
tether's will.

The Attorney- Genei^al, — Were you on friendly terms with him ? Always.

i.ord Campbell. — Had you the care of him ? I had the care constantly of him.

The Attorney-General. — I believe he became entitled to a sum of money ? To some
property. — ^Worth about how much? I should think altogether he has had about 12,000/.
— Was he intended for any profession ? He was articled to the law ; T am hardly prepared
to say the exact amount he had, but about 12,000/. — He was articled to a solicitor? He
was articled to a solicitor at Worthing in Sussex. — IHd he follow up that profession ?
He did not follow it. — We have heard that he betook himself to the turf, to racing pur-
suits ? Recently.— About what period was that ? I have known so little about these
matters and hanre always set my race against them so much, that I can hardly say ; I think
about three or four years : his earliest betting- book that I find is in 1853, perhaps in
1852 ; the dates are not very distinct. — EWd you do what you could to withdraw him
from that pursuit ? Everything in my power. — When was the last time prior to his
death that you saw him ? At 2 o'clock on the afternoon of the 5th of November.

Lord Campbell. — ^You continued on friendly terms with him? Yes, affectionate
terms.

The Attorney-General, — ^Where was that you saw him? At the station at.Euston
Square. — Where was he leaving for at that time ? I have some recollection that he told
me he was going to Rugeley ; I am not quite sure. — Now in what state of health was he at
that time ? He looked better than I had seen him for a very long time. — Do you remem-
ber making any remark to him about his looks? I was so gratified that T said, " My boy,
you look very well ; you do not look anything of an invalid now." — Do you remember
tile answer he made you ; if you feel any doubt about it never mind ; he made you some
answer: there was nothing in anything he said to induce you to believe that he meant
otherwise ? He struck himself firmly on the chest and said he was quite well.

Mr. Serjeant-Shee, — I do not object to what he said.

The Attomey-Oeneral, — Tell us what he said about the state of his healtlj.: I do not
mean intentionally, only sometimes other matters come ont : as far as I am aware, there
is no other matter than that in the proof; I am not aware there is anythinff else : tell us
what he said about the state of his health ? He merely said he was quite well, quite
right. — He was not a robust man ? I think he added that he was quite happy at being
all right. — We have heard he was not a robust man in point of appearance ? In point of
appearance he was not a robust man ; he was very pale, pale complexion. — Had there
been to your knowledge anything the matter with him recently before that time ? For
some months in the previous winter he had a sore throat, some months before. — Do you
know whether at that time he contemplated going abroad ? He was staying with me
then. — I merely ask the general question ?

Mr. Serjeant Shee, — I think we cannot have that.

The Attorney-General. — Very well. {To the witness) You did not see him again until
after his death, when he was a corpse r Yes. — ^When did you first hear of his death ?
On Wednesday evening, the 21st of November. — ^Who gave you the information ? Mr.
Jones of Lutterworth. — The surgeon ? Yes.

Lord Campbell. — Was that by letter ? No j Mr. Jones came to my house to in-
form me.

The Attorney-General. — That was on the Wednesday ? Yes. — I believe on the next
day, Thursday, you went down with Mr. Jones to Lutterworth ? • Yes. — That was to
search for his will and any papers he had left ? Yes. — Did you find a will ? Yes, we
found a will. — And the next day you went to Rugeley ? The next morning we went to
Rugeley. — About what time did you go to Rugel<^? Between 12 and 1 o'clock, I think.
— Did you proceed to see the body ? As soon as 1 arrived at the inn I asked to see the
body. — ^Were you then accompanied by Palmer ? I was. — Had you gone to Palmer on
your arrival at Rugeley ? I met Palmer in the passage of the inn.

THIRD PAY, BlLY 1% 1856. 79

Lord CampmUm— The Talbot Arms ? Yes, the T^bot Arma
Th€ Atiomey-General ^^Vid yoa know Palmer before ? I beliere I had oaee seen him :
I did not kuow bim. — ^Aud did he make himself known to you, or how did 70a become
acquainted with him? Mr. Jonee introduced me to him. — in the inft? in the inn
pessag^. — And then Palmer aeeompanied you up stairs to see the body ? He followed us
up stairs. — The sheet was removed from the body ? Palmer remoyed the sheet from the
body. — How fSM- down was the body uncoyered by the removal oif the sheet? Rather
below the waist : I think the thighs were partly uncoyered. — ^Was there anything about
fhe i^pearanee of the countenance that struck you ? Yes ; I was yery mueh struck by
the appearance of the countenance. — In what respect ? The first thing I noticed was a
tightness of the muscles across the foce. — ^Anything else ? I beliey^r the first thought
that struck me . . . . — ^Jnst tell me what you saw, what you obseryed, not what peseerf in
your own mind, unless it was expressed in Palmer^ s presence ; if it was, well and good ;
if not, do not tell us what passed in your own thoughts ? It was that tightness of the
nmseles across the foce that principally struck me.

Lord Cahpbell. — ^You say you first observed the tightness of the muscles across the
face ; did you observe anything else ? There did not appear to me to be any emaciation.
— From disease ? From disease.

The Attorney-General. — Now, after you had looked at the countenance of the deceased,
I beJieve you went down stairs after that ? We went down stairs.

Lord Campbeix. — ^You both went down stairs ? We all went down stairs, Mr. J<^es
as well.

The Attomey^G^neml. — Mr. Jones was present when you saw the corpse ? Yes. — Did
you nmke any inquiry of Paloier on the subject of Cook's affairs ? After some time I
said to him, I believe . ► . • — Where were you at that time, when you got down stairs ?
In one of the sitting-sooms in the ino. — Now tell us what passed on the subject of his
affairs?

Lord Cahpbell. — What did you say to Palmer ? I said, ** I hear from Mr. Jones,
Mr. Palmer, that you know something of my son's affairs ; can you tell me anything
about them ?" Bfe replied, " Yes, there are 4000/. worth of bills out of his, and I am
sorry to say my name is to them ; but I have got a paper drawn up- by a lawyer, signed
by Mr. Cook, to show that I have never had any benefit from them," or ** never had the
money," I forget the precise expression.

The Attomeif'GeneraL — ^What did you say to that? I expressed great surprise, and
said, ** I fear there will not be four thousand shillings to pay them ;" bat I said, '* Has
he no horses, or no property ?" he said, ** Yes,, he has horses, but they are mortgaged ;"
I said, ** Has he no sportioff bets owing to him ; nothing of that sort ? " I am stating the
weeds as nearly as I can ; ne menticmed one debt of 3001, that was owing to him» — Do
yoa rememkber the name of the person from whom it was owing ? Is it material that I
shoaJd state the name ? — X do not know why you should not : I think you had better ? It
ivould be with great pain ; the man is dying at this present moment ; I do not think it is
material. — Has it been received since ? X^o.

Lord CAHpBS2LL.r~Do you think it is material ?

The Attorney 'General. — I do not know. Witness^ — ^It has had nothing to do with the
prisoner, or any party connected with him.

The Attorney- General. — ^Then give us the name on a bit of paper, and we will pass it
by for the present.

Lord Campbell. — It ought to be either publicly pronounced, or we should pass it
over.

The Attomey»General. — Very well, if your Lordship pleases. (To the witness) Was it
a sporting debt ? No, it was not a sporting debt. — It has nothing whatever to do with
it ? It has nothing whatever to do with it.

Mr. Serjeant Shee. — It had better be handed to my Lord: I do not see any bearing that
it has upon it ; at present I do not see any occasion for it : if by any accident it shall
appear important hereafter your Lordship will see what it is.

The Attomey-General. — It had nothing to do with sporting matters; a personal debt
from a relative of his ? Yes. — For 300/. ? Yes.— Did he mention any other debt due to
him? He did not.

Lord Campbell. — In answer to the question, you say ** I said, has he no sporting
debts owing to him, and he said there was not anything of that sort, he. mentioned one
debt of 300/." ? He said he did not know of any other.

The Attomey-General, — Was anything further said at that time on the flobject of hii

go TRIAL OF WILLIAM PALMER.

affairs, or was that all ; bave yoa told ns all that then passed on the sulijeet of his dehts ?
I said, I thought his sporting creditors would hare to take his sporting bets and make
the best of them, for I should pay nothing. — Now was anything said at that interview
on the subject of his funeral ? I then turned round and said, ** whether he has left any-
thing or not, poor fellow, he must be buried." — You said this ? I said this. — ^Wbat did
Palmer say ? Palmer then immediately said, *' Oh ! I will bury him myself if that is
all/' What did you say ? I said, I cannot hear of your doing that ; his brother-in-law
was present, the husband of his sister. — ^He had come there ? He had come there to meet
me. — ^Did he make any remark f He immediately expressed a great wish to be allowed*
to bury him ; I said, " No, no, that is my business ; as executor, I must take care and
bury lum." — He had appointed you his executor under his will ? Yes. — ^Was anything
said by you on the subject of the body remaining at the inn? . I said, ** I cannot have
the funeral immediately, because I intend to bury him in London, in his mother's grave ;
I am yery sorry for the inconvenience to the people here at the inn, but I will get it
done as soon as possible ;" Palmer said, *' Oh ! that is of no consequence, but the body
ought to be fastened up at once:" he repeated that in other words ; he said, '* so long as
the body is fastened up, it is of no consequence for a day or two.'* — Now I believe that
terminated the conversation on that subject for the time ? For the time. — Tell me what
took place after that? While I was talking to the deceased's brother-in-law, Palmer
and Mr. Jones left the room. — Did they afterwards return ? They returned in about
half an hour. — On their return, what took place ? On their return I expressed a desire
to know from Palmer the name of some respectable undertaker that I might call in. —
Some undertaker in Rugeley ? Some undertaker in Rugeley. — Did you say for what ? I
said that I might at once order a coffin, and give directions for the fhneral. — ^What did

Palmer say upon that ? To my great surprise . — Never mind that ; give us any

surprise that you expressed to him ; tell ns exactly what you said? Palmer said, ** Oh I
I have been and done that, I have ordered a shell and a strong oak cdBln."

Lord Campbell. — ^Did he say to whom he had been ? He did not.

The Attorney-General. — ^What did you say to that ? I then expressed my surprise. —
Do you remember in what language, in what terms you expressed it ? I said, I think, •* I
did not give you any authority ;" those were the words, some expression of that sort, I
expressed my surprise in terms of that kind. — Did you say anything further upon the
subject ? I said, " But 1 must see the undertaker, to give him instructions about the
funeral." — Is that all ? I think he told me the name of the undertaker, I am not quite
sure. — Now you, I think, ordered dinner that day at the inn ? I then ordered dinner. —
Whom did yon ask to dine with you ? I ordered dinner for myself and my son-in4aw
and Mr. Jones, and I asked Palmer to come himself. — And I believe you all dined
together at the inn ? We all dined together at the inn. — Yon were going back to London
that afternoon ? I was going back to London by the quarter-past four train. — At what
time did you dine ? We dined about three. — Now, after dinner, before yon went away,
do you remember making a request to Mr. Jones, Palmer being then present? I did. —
What did you ask Jones to do? I desired Mr. Jones to be so good as to go up stairs and
get me his betting-book or pocket-book, or any books or papers that might be there. — Did
you know, of your own knowledge, from him that he was in the habit of keeping a betting-
book ? I had seen him with a betting-book. — Do you recollect the sort of book it was ?
That particular book I do not, I have seen his other betting-books. — I suppose, as one
betting-book was filled up, he would take another? \ Yes, those I have seen were clasp-
books, long. — ^Now did Mr. Jones, upon this request, leave the room ? Mr. Jones left the
room. — ^Did Palmer follow him ? Palmer did follow him. — How soon afterwards did
they return? I should think nearly ten minutes, certainly more than five minutes, I
should say. — ^Did Mr. Jones tell you the result of the search that was made? Mr. Jones
came into the room and said he was very sorry to say that he could not find any betting-
book. — ^Was Palmer present at this time ? Palmer was present, he followed him in.

Lord Campbell. — ^He could not find any betting-book ? No ; and I think he added,
or papers ; I desired him to search for them.

The Attomey^General, — What did you say upon that ? I said, " No betting-book^
Mr. Jones I" and, turning towards Palmer, I said, " How is this ?" Palmer said, *' It is
no manner of use if you find it ;" or very nearly to that effect. — Did he say why ? I
said, "No use, sir! I am the best judge of that;" he again said, ** It is no manner of
use ;** I said, " I am the best judge of that ; I am told it is of use ; I understand my son
won a great deal of money at Shrewsbury," I am giving the words as nearly as 1 can,
" and 1 ought to know something about it ;" Palmer said, " It is no use, I assure you •
when a man dies his bets are done with :" I think those were the words ; besides, he
said Mr. Cook had received the greater part of his money on the course at Shrewsbui*y ;

THIRD DAT, Hat 1$, 1856. gl

I said, ** Very w^, nr, <lte book aiiist be found; it ougbt to be fouad, ud mast he
found ;" Palmer then, in a mach qmeter tone, said, *' CHi I it will be found, no doubt;"
I again said, " Sir, it shall be found :" 1 then went to the door of the sittiBg^Tooin, and,
calling^ to the hoasekee^r at the bar, I desired that eTerjthing in the decttsed's room
might be locked up, that nothing might be touehed until I returned dt sent some one
with authority to Iske possesrion.-^Now I b^eve that after that, and prior to leaving,
^oa went up stttrs to take your last look at the body ? I did. — ^Did you nnd any persona
in the room ? I saw some servants in the room turning ap the bed-dotiies over, the
empty beds. — Were the undertaker's people there ? The undertaker was there.-^H8d yon
held any communication with the undertaker in the mean while ? Yes ; before that I had.
-—Before yon went to dinner ? Before I went to dinner. — Had you given him instmoj
tions to oorae ? I had given him instmotiotts for sending the body to London. — Had yov
given him instmclaons to place the body in the ooffin ? Yes ; I had. — What was the
undertaker doing when you went into the room ? He was standing by the side of the
fihell ; the body had been just placed in the shelL — Had you given directions for that f
Yes ; I had given general directions.

Mr. Babon Aldebsok. — ^Was it in the shell ? It was in the shell.

The Attorney-General, — ^Now you went to the side of the shell to the body f I went to

the side of the shell. — Did you uncover the body at all ? The body was uncovered. —

Wha,t did you do ? I knelt down by the side of the shell ; and, taking the hand of the

corpse, I found it fastened in this way (the witness clenched Jiis Jist), — ^Which hand?

The right hand.

Lord Campbell. — The right hand was clenched ? Yes ; the right hand was clenched.
The Attomey-General. — Then did you direct your attention to the left hand? I
looked across the body, and I saw that the left hand was clenched in the same manner.-*
Now did you observe anything else? Nothing else.— * And you returned to town, I
believe, that night ? i returned immediately to town. — And the i^ext day you communis
cated with your London solicitors ? The next morning I communicated first with the
uncle of the deceased, and then with my solicitors. — And they gave you a letter, I believe,
to Mr. Gardiner of Rugeley. Yes. — Did you return to Rugeley the next day ? I returned
to Rugeley at two o'clock on the next day. — That would be the Saturday ? The Saturday.
— When do you say you arrived at Rugeley ? I left town .

Lord Campbell. — ^You arrived at about what time ? I think at about eight.

The Attomey-OeneraL — Yon left London by the two-o'olock train, and got to Rugeley
about eijrht ? About eight.— On your way down did you see Palmer ? On my arrival at
Hie platK»rm at Euston-square I saw Palmer.

Lord Campbell. — You saw him as yon were leaving London ? Yes, as I was leaving
London. — What did he tell you that he was there for ? He said he had been summoned
to London. — ^That was at Euston-square ? That was at Euston-square.

The Attorney- General, — ^What did he tell you? That he had received a telegraph
message after I left.—Is that all that passed then? Which had brought him to London.
— Is that all that passed then ? I think I asked him where Mr. Cook's horses were
kept ; he told me at Hednesford. I think he said he would drive me out there if I
wished it.

Mr. Baron Alderson. — ^Where is that ?

Mr. James, — ^It is near Rugeley ; about three miles from Rugeley, I am told.

The Attomey-^Generdt. — Did yon see him again when you got to Wolverton ? When I
got to Wolverton I saw him again in the refreAment<room. — ^The train stops there for a
lew minutes ? The train stops there for a few minutes. — ^Did any conv^'sation take place
between vou? I said, "Mr. Palmer, this is a very melancholy thing, the death of my
pour son happening so suddoily, and I think for the sake of his brother and siister, who
are sometimes deucate in health, it would be desirable to know what his complaints
were."

Lord Campbell. — By his brother and sister, you mean your children by his
mother?

The Attorney-General. — ^Do you mean his half-brother and sister ? His half-brother
and his own sister ; I think I said it might be desirable that their medical friends should
know something of his complaint, " and therefore I think I should like his body opened ;"
to that Palmer replied, ** That can be done very well ;" or " That can be easily done ;" or
something of that sort ; I think nothing more passed then, or very little more ; nothing
of importance ; the bell rang and we went to our seats.— 7 As far as Wolverton had he
travelled with you in the same carriage ? No, he had been in another carriage. — Did he
continue in the same carriage ? He continued in the same carriage which he had been in

p

82 TRIAL OC. WILLUH PALMBR.

Mbre till we feached Bogby. — What took place then? I tben saw kim again in the
refreaknieBt-room ; he came to my side, indeed, as I was standing before the fire, and, I
am sot quite saue^at that time or upon my arrival at Rugeley, I said to him, '* Mr. Palmer,
I think as I am living at a distance, ami the horses are said to be TalmiMe, I had better
ask some so!U<utor at Angeley to look alter my imtevests ;" he said, ''Oh yes, you can do
that; do you know any solidtor?" I said, '*No, I do net;" I brieve the bell rang
again, and I ran off to get some refreshment, or tor some pmr^os*, and when I came back
to my carriage I foand rftlmer sitting there.->~in your carriam ? in fay 'carriage ; nothing
tether passed till w« reached Rugeley ; no conversation.— -Were yon alone, or was there
anybody else in the carnage ? There was a gentleman and lady in the carriage, with
whom 1 had been conversing all the way ^m town, and I continued my conversation
with them. — >When did you arrive at Rugeley ? Between seven and eight ; about eight,
I think. — ^Did anything happen when you got to Rugeley? When we reached Rugel^,
Palmer said, '* Yon were talking about a solicitor;" he again said, *'Do you know any
aoUcitor in Rugeley ?" — Whei^ were you then ? I think at that time we had reached the
omnibus ; 1 am not quite clear whether it was on the pbttform or we had reached the om-
nibus ; we were but a v^ery few minutes in the station ; I said " No, I do not ; for yon
know 1 am a perfect stranger here;" he then said, " Ohl I know them all intimately; I
can introduce you to one;.' he said, *^ When I get home I must take a cup of co&e, and
as soon as I have had that I will come over and tell you all about it ;" i thanked {him,
as I had done once before, and said I would not trouble Mm; he then repeated his
offer, that he only wanted a cup of coffee, and he would come to me immediately;
but he added, " You will not find any solicitor to-night ; " I said, " Why not ? " he said,
** It is late ; besides, some of them live out of town ; " ** Well," I said, •* I never found
any difficulty in finding a solicitor when I wanted one before : " I think it was imme-
diately after that that, changing the tone of my voice and manner, I said, '* Mr. Palmer, if I
should call in a solicitor to give me advice, I suppose you will have no objec6on to answer
him any questions he might choose to put to you." — ^Did you alter your tone, as you
spoke of, purposely ? Purposely ; I had previously mentioned the post-mortem. — I>id
the alteration of your tone and manner appear to you to produce any impression upon
him? The mt>on was shining, but I cannot say that I could see his face distinctly. —
What did he say in answer ? He said, with a spasmodic affection of the throat, which
was perfectly evident, " Oh, no, certainly not." — You say you had previously mentioned
the post-mortem examination to him, or the intention of having one? I had mentioned
my desire to have the body opened. — Now, do you remember, when yon were talking on
the subject of the solicitor, was anything said about taking a scdicitor to Hednesford ?
Yes ; I expressed my desire first. — Did anything further teke place between you ? I
ought to say, when I mentioned the post-mortem there was not the slightest change in
Mr. Palmer's manner ; he was perfectly calm and collected. — ^Now, after this conversa*>
tioD, and your asking him whether he would answer any questions, did anything further
take place ? There was a pause for three or four minutes ; he then again proposed to come
over to me after he had had his coffee to tell me about the solicitor, and I agsdn begeed
that he would not trouble himself. — ^Do you remember anything being said about going
to Hednesford ? Very late in the evening. — ^Was anything said upon the subject of the
bills ? In the course of the evening, some hours after. — 1 am anxious to get at anything
which may be material, and not to take you through a conversation many parts of which
may be unimportant ; do you remember anything being said about the bills ? In the
course of the evening he came over to me again.— After he had been home ? After he
had been home, and after I had been some time absent seeking for Mr. Gardiner. — ^You
went to Mr. Gardiner? I went to his house that night.— Aiier yo«i came back he came
to you, what passed ? let us bring you together ; he eame to you, and what took plaoe ?
I thitk the first thing was about the bills.-^! want to hear'what he said about that?
He said, "It is a very unpleasant affair for me about these biUs^ V I said, '*I think it
right I should tell you, Mr. Palmer, that dace I saw you 1 have heard sather a different
account of Mr. Cook's affairs : " he said, " Oh, indeed ; well, 1 hope it will be settled
pleasantly, at all events," or " at any rate:" I said, " It will ouly be settled, sir, in the
Court of Chancery," or " His affairs can only be settled there," 1 do not recollect the
precise words : I think he said again, " Oh, indeed," in a lower tone. — Did anything
further take place that evening? I think he then, after a short pause, asked me what
friends Mr. Cook had to visit in the neighbourhood of London: this conversation, I
think, passed at that time, what friends he had to visit in the neighbourhood of London,
and what friends he visited ; I said " several : " ** I mean," he says, " who does he stay
with when he goes there ? "

Lord Campbell. — Is this important ?

The Attorney-General, — One does not know what it may lead to ? From the questions

THIRD DAT, 1£at 16, 1856. 83

he pot to me, lie wiihed to know wlio haA trid me.— It is net malterial ; the next da^ did
yoa see bim again P I aim not quite sure irhether tint tame evening he did not speak about
soing to Epsom« — The nest day, Sanday, did yon see him a^n ? The next day, San-
day, I saw hhn again, in the OTening. — At what time ? I think between five and six ;
aboat six o'clook. — Did he eome to yon? He came into the eoffee-iroom ; my dmner was
preparing, and I was writiDg. — ^Were yon alone, or was any pemen present ? Nobody
was preeent. — Did he say anting about your going over to Hednesford ? lamnot snre
whether it was said om that night or the night before ; this was what was said upon the
subject : we were talking*of going to Hednesford. — ^The trainer Mved Hiere, Saunders ? Tes ;
and he said, ^ If I were yoo, i wonld not take a soUcitor with me there: ** 1 said, ''Why
not, Mr. Palmer ; " he said, ** I should leeomniend you not," or ** advise yon not," I
do not kxuTW which : I said, ** Sir, I shall us e my own judgment upon that ; " he ssud,.
"Of course yon will; " I said, ** Of course I sfa»U."-^Had yon any conversation on that
day on the subject of the p08l>*mortem examination ? On the Sunday I had. — ^Was that
at this same interview ? No, it was not at the same interview.— >Wliat time was that in
the day ? I am not sure whether it was not after the evening service. — You were spender^
ing of about fbur or five o'clock ? No, the evening service, seven o'clock. — ^What took
place on the subject of the post-mortem examination ? He came into the room

Lord Campbell. — Later in the evening ? I think it was later in the evening, I am.
not quite sore ; I know it was Sunday evening.

The Attomey-Geaeral. — ^Wfaat happened then ? ^e came into the room ; I was sitting*
writing, and he approached me with a piece of paper in his hand as if he would five it
me ; I did not take it firom him, I did not take any «notiee of him ; I went on with my
writing, and said, ** Pray Mr. Palmer, who is Mr. Smith of this place? " — Did you men-
tion the Christian name or not ? No, I did not. — What answer did he make ? He said,
** Smith, Smith, Smith," two or three times in that way, as if he did not know such a
person ; I said, ** A Mr. Smith who sat up with my son one night; who slept in the room,
or sat np with my son," he said, " Oh ! he is a solicitor in this town;" I said, " I ask
yoa tbe queaticm, sir, because as the betting:-book is missing I should wish to know who<
was with the young man ; " I first said, '* Is he a solidtor in practice here ? " and he said
" Yes ;" after a short pause 1 said, " Pray, Mr. Palmer, did you attend my poor son in
a medical capacity ? " he said, ^ Oh dear, no ; " I said, '^ I ask you that question because-
I am determined to have his bod^ examined, and if you had attended him medically I
suppose the gentlemen I shall call in would think it proper that you should be present."
I think the next thing he said was, *' Can you tell me who is to perform the examina-
tion ? " or words to that efifect. — What did you say ? I said, " I cannot, I shall not
know myself until the morning ; but I think it right to tell you of it ; I shall have it
done for my satisfaction, and whether you are present or not is a matter of indifference
to me if the gentlemen employed think it right you should attend;'' ^* So it is to me,"
he said. — I have only one other question on that subject : did he at any time, other than
this, ask you who the medical gentlemen were to be who were to perform the post-mortem,
exazninalion ? He requested it immediately again.— ^When ? That morning; and I said,
" I do not know, I cannot tell myself.*' — On the Friday, when you twice saw the body^
when you say Mr. Palmer, without your authority, gave the orders for the shell and
coffin, did you perceiye any manifestation of decomposition in the body cht anything which
called for its being speedily put into a shell ? — On the contrary, the body did not quite
look to me like a dead body.; I was surprised at the appearance of it.

Cross-examined by Mr. Serjeant Shoe,
Yon were on aHectionate terms, you say, with your step-son } Yes. — Did he ever stay
at yonr house when he came to London ? The last time that he stayed at my house for-
a length of time was about a month in January and February last year. — For what time
did he stay then ? He stayed about a month. — Was his heahh bad then ? He had ^en
a sGgfat sore diroat.— -Was it continruously sore? I do not temember that it was ; it did
not attract my notice every 'day.— Did he oomfdain of it frwsL time to time during-
the whole of iMs visit ? He did not. — Did it make it difficult foe him to swallow occa-
sioually ? Not in the least; ^ere was nothing in it that attracted my notice. — Had he
any ulcers about his face at that time ? I never noticed them. — You had seen him some
time, I presume, between that time and the 5th of November ? I saw him three
or four times in tiie course of the summer, and I think twice or thrice in the-
month of October. — Did he appear to you on those occasions to be in delicate*
health ? Not at all delicate, not more than usual. — I ask you, for this reason ; you
said he looked better than you had seen him for a long time, and you were so gratified
that you saod, ** My boy, you look very well, yon have no look of an invalid now."
0« the oceasion taat yoa saw him previously to that 5th .of November, had he

F 2

84 TRIAL OF WILLIAM PALMEK.

looked like an invalid? No. — Had he not been an invalid? He hUd complained
of being an invalid in the previous winter, and he said, if he iras not better the next
winter, his medical friend had told^him he had bertter go to a warm climate ; it was that
oocasieBed me to wy, ** You do not look like an invalid."*— Were his brother and sister
delicate or strong ? His brother and sister were rather delicate, not strong ; his brother
more delicate in appearance than in reality^ — Do you know at what «ge his father died ?
His father died, I think, at the age of 30 or 81. — Did he refer to yoa on the occasion of
a wish to insure his life ? No. — Yoa do not know that he ever jyoposed to insure his
life? No.-«>Do yon know a Dr. Todd? I do not.-^When the betting-book was lost I
collect from the manner in which you gave your evidence that ^rou were very much
dissatisfied about that? I was.— And you complained to the people in the house? No.
— You called to some persons ? I called to the housekeeper ; I went to the door of the
sitting-room at right angles with the door of the bar and called to the housekeeper. — Did
you inquire of her ? No ; I desired that every thiog belonging to him mieht be locked
up.— As soon as you got to Bugeley, I take it, you went to Mr. Gardiner, did you not ?
No. — I do not mean the first time you went to Bugeley ? Yes, when I returned to
Bugeley. — When you returned to Bugeley with Palmer did you on that evening go to
Mr. Gardiner? That evening I went to seek for Mr. Gardiner.

Lord Campbell. — He was not at home ? No.

Mr. tietjeant Shee» — Did you see Mr. Gardiner during the time ^ou were at Bugeley ?
I saw Mr. Gardiner on the following morning; the Sunday morning.— Have you ever
been in communication with a person of the name of Field? Once. — A police officer?
Yes.— When was that ? I should think about a fortnight or three weeks after my son
was buried Field called on me, what for I do not know ; I do not know what he wanted ;
I ne^er applied to Field.

The Attomey-Qenerah — It had no reference to this ?

Mr. Baron Aldebson. — What was the name of the gentleman who went down with
you that married the sister ? Bradford. — It was Bradfoni that dined with you ? Yes. —
Did you hear of a Mr. Bamford ? I called on Mr. Bamford. — Because you have not
mentioned him ? No, I was not asked any question. — ^Wben did you first hear that Mr.
Bamford had been his medical attendant ? Mr. Jones told me, without mentioning his
name, in London, that a medical gentleman had been called in. I called upon bun to
thank him for his kindness, and to ask what I was indebted to him.

The Attomey-Qeneral, — Did Bamford dine with you ? No.

Mr. Baron Aldbbson. — We have got it in a copy of the deposition Bamford instead
of Bradford dined with him.

MABY KEELING sworn.— Examined by Mr. WeUhy,
You are a widow living at Bugeley ? Yes. — Were you fetched on Wednesday morning
the 21st November last to lay out Mr. Cook's body ? Yes.— Did any other woman go
with you? *My sister-in-law. — What time did you get to the Talbot Arms? About
1 o'clock. — ^About 1 in the night ? One in the morning. — Did you find the body still
warm ? The body was still warm, but the hands and arms were cold. — How was the
body lying ? On the back, straight down tiie bed. — How were the arms ? Crossed upon
the chest. — Did you observe anything particular about the body? No, nothing very-
particular. — 1 do not mean in its appearance ? His head lay a little on one side ; turned,
on one side. — Was the body stiff or not ? \erj stiff indeed. — Have you laid out many-
corpses? Yes.— Have you ever seen one so stiff before? No.— Had you any difficulty
in straightening the arms ? Yes, we had ; we could not keep his arms straight down to
his body. — ^Did you fasten them in any way to keep them down ? We drew a piece of
tape under his back and tied them down to his body ; we tied it round his wrists.

Lord Campbell. — Who did ? I did.— Both arms ? Both arms.*
Mr. WefeJy.- Did you obsenre anything particular about either of the feet ? Hi«
right foot was turned on one side.— Inwards or outwards? Turned to the outside.— Had
you any difficulty in turning it so as to turn it to the other foot? We were obliged to
take a piece of tape to tie both his feet together. — ^Were the eyes open or shut ? Open.— -
Had yon any difficulty in dosdng them ? Yes, it was a considerable time befbre vre closed
them.— Why? His eyWids were very stiff.— How were the hands? Very stiff.—
Were they open or closed? Closed.— Did Mr. Palmer come up stairs? Mr. Palmer
went up stairs with me. — For what purpose ? He lighted me w^ile I took two rings off
of Mr. Cook's fingers. — Were they, off the fingers of bo A hands or one hand ? One hsoid.
— Had you any difficulty in getting the hand Open to take the Tings off? Yes, his fingers
were very stiff. — You did get them off, I believe? Yes.— When you had taken them off
did the band close again? Yes.— Did you, while you were there that morning, see any-

. THISD DAY, Mat 16, 1856. 85

thing of a betting-book ? Nor^Or a small ttook like a pocket-book ? No, not any book
ataU.

Gfost-exfunined by Mr. Groce.
Now, yon said yoa were obliged to use a piece of tape ; is it not a usual thing to
use tape to get dead bodies straight after deatii? Not to tie the arms together. —
Do you not use tape? Yes. — I asked you whether it was not usual to use tape for
the purpose of tying the body, so as to lay it straight? No.— Do you never use tape?
No, 1 never used tapef not to tie the arms.— You added to that last answer "not to tie
the arms :" I ask you do you use tape at all? No. — Not for any purpose ? No.

^ Lord Campbell. — In laying out a dead body, do you use tape ? I have used it for
tying the ankles together, but not the arms.

Mr. Grove. — Have you used it for the toes on other occasions ? Yes, for the toes. —

Have you ever seen it used for the arms when they are not in a proper position, or

laid out shortly after death? No, never. — You have not seen it used for the arms?

No. — ^Is it usual to lay the arms by the side Immediately the person dies ? Yes. —

Those who are present ? Yes, whoever is present. — Then, if the body gets stiff, the

arms remain in the position in which they were laid down at the time of the death ? Yes. —

Is not considerable difficulty frequently found in keepine the eyes closed ? Yes ; there is

very great difficulty in closing the eyes. —Just attend to my question : is it not fre-

qoentiy found that there is a difficulty in keeping the eyes of corpses closed? Not if

^ey are closed as soon as they die.^-Is it not a common thing to put penny-pieces on

the eyes alter death to keep them closed ? Yes. — Is that because if not so kept down the

eyelid would draw back, and be difficult again to close. Yes. — I believe the jaw is also

tied as shortly after death as can be done ? Yes.

Re-examined by the Attomey-Generah

How. many dead bodies have you laid out in your time? Well, I cannot exactly re-
collect; many children. — Have you laid out a great many? Yes. — Of all ages? Yes.
;— You say you have never known of the arms being tied before ? No, I never did. — It
is usual, you say, however, to lay the arms straight by the side of the body ? Yes. —
Immediately after death? Yes. — How soon after death: what do you mean by im-
mediately ? In a few minutes after they are gone. — How' soon after Mr. Cook's decease,
as far as you understood, did you come in? They called me up at half-past 12. —
How soon did you get there ? And it was half-past 1 when 1 went up-stairs. — On what
occasions have you found it necessary to tie the ankles and to tie the toes ? Sometimes
the feet are apt to give way. — In what way do you mean give way ? Outside. — ^How
soon after de^h have you found that the case ; has it been on your first laying out the
corpse, or subsequently, that you have had to tie the feet or ankles, and the toes?
About half an hour.— Now, you say that the eyelids of the eyes of this corpse were very
stiff? Yes. — ^Was it in consequence of their being so stiff that you could not close the
eyes ? "Yes. — Have you known that the case with other corpses ? No ; I have not. —
Where you have found it to be necessary, or known it to be necessary, to place penny-
pieces on the lids in order to keep them down, have the lids there been stiff? Yes ; I
have put penny-pieces qn myself. — "Why was that ? I cannot tell you. — In those cases
the lids ^were not stiff like these, I understand you to say? Not quite so stiff.

Dr. JOHN THOMAS HARLAND swom.—Examined by Mr. Bodkm,
You are a physician residing at Stafford? Yes. — Did you on the 26th of November
go from Stafford to Rugeley to make a post-mortem examination of Mr. Cock? I did. —
At what time did you arrive at Rugeley? About 10 o'clock.— In the morning? Yes. —
Did you call on jrour arrival there at the house of a Mr. Bamford, a medical practitioner
there? Yes. — Did any person join you as you went to Mr. Bamford? Yes. — Who?
Palmer. — Did you notice from whence he came? Yes; from the back of his (Palmer's)
house. — He joined you in the street ? Yes. — Were you acquainted with him before ?
I had frequently seen him, and I have spoken to him at Rugeley. — ^On his joining you
what did he say ? He said, " I am glad you have come to make a pos1>-mortem exami-
nation; some one might have been sent whom I did not know; I know you." — ^What
did you say ? I said, '^ What is this case? I hear there is a suspicion of poisoning;"
he saidy ''Oh no! I think not; he had an epileptic fit on Monday and Tuesday night,
and yoa will find an old disease in the heart and in the head ;" we then went on to
Mr. Bamford. — ^You wenton tc^ther to Mr. Bamford; did you go toother into Mr.
Bamford's house ? Yes.* — ^Did Palmer make any observation to you while you were in
there ? I was requested to go from Stafford to be present at the post-mortem, and I had
brooght BO instromeuts with me. — Was anything said about that ? Palmer said he had
iiistniBkenta» and he offered. to lend them to me. — Besides that, did he make any observa-

86 ' TKIAL OT WILLIAM PALMER.

tion to y<m about any person ? Ye« ; he aid a queer old wan seettied to inspect him ; he
did not know what he would be at, or what he wanted;: he also said, "He seemB to
suspect that I have got the betting-book, but Coo]^ had no betting-book that would be of
use to any one;" Mr. Bamford and I then went f Mr. Prere'a.— Did he give you any
other description of the man whom he calted a queer old man?

Lord Cahpbeix. — ^There can be no doubt he mesnt Mr. Stevens.
* Mr. Serjeant Shee.r— There can he bo doubt about that.

Mr. -PodAth.— Then you went to Mr. Frere's? Yea.— Is Mr. Frere a surgeon in

Kugeiey ? Yes, inJRngeley.— Did anything pass there ? Mr. Prere told me . —Was

Palmer there ? No, he was not.— Then did you proceed from Mr. Frere's to the Talbot
Arms? Yes. — Was the post-mortem examination then proceeded with? Yes. — Who ope-
rated ? Mr. Devonshire, and Mr. IQewton assisted him. — Who were in the room ? Mr.
Bamford, Palmer, and several other persons. — ^Did you stand near Mr. Devonshire who
operated? Yes. — You observed what was gomg ou? Yes.— Did you notice anything
externally that you think it necessary to mention with respect to the body ? The body-
was very stiff.

Lord Campbell. — Stiifcr than dead bodies usually are ? Yes.

Mr. Bodkin. — Did you notice Ac muscles ? Yes.

Lord Campbelu — This was six days after death ?

The Attorney-General. — Yes, on Monday the 26tb.

Lord Campbell. — ^Was the body stifier than bodies are six days after death ? Yes.

Mr. Bodkin. — What state were the muscles of the body in ? They were very highly
developed. — ^Did it appear to you to be a healthy development, or the result of spasms ;
what do you mean by highty developed ? I mean strongly contracted, and thrown out.

Lord Camfbbll.-^I suppose it showed there was a strong epasmodjie action in the
body ? Yes.— Before death ? Yes.

Mr. Bodkin.^VMi you ezaaniiie the hands ? Yes. — In vdmt state were they ? They
were clenched, firmly closed. — What part of the body was first ezanUBed intentally ?
The abdominal viscera.

Lord Campbell. — Was a report agreed on by the medical men who assisted in the
examination? Yes.— Was it written? Yes. — Have you that written report? I wrote it,
— ^Have you got it here ? No, I have not got it with me.

Lord Campbell. — It ia always read in Scotland by the medical men who are to be
examined upon it.

Mr. Bodkin. — ^Do you know who has it ? I sent it to Mr. Stevens.

Mr. Bodkin. — I believe Dr. Taylor has it.

Lord Campbell. — I think it is worth while to wait for it ; it is best for both sides.

The Attorney-General. — I think we had much better exanune him in the asual way.

Mr. Serjeant Shee. — We mast have the report at some time or other.

The Attomey-General.^^Yon may have it at once ; but I think it better to have him
examined.

Mr. Serjeemt Shee. — It will be produced?

The Attomep'General. — Certainly.

Lord Campbell. — ^He may read it as his evidence i£ he swears to it.

Mr. Bodkin. — Are these the notes you made at the time ? Yes.

Lord CAMPBELLr— Do you now swear that that is a true account ot what you then
saw ? Yes. — Then read it, Dr. Harland, if you please. ** Post-mortem examination of
John Parsons Cook, Esq." {Bead the Report.)

Mr. Serjeant Shee.— I dare say I shall be allowed a copy of that.

The Attomey^encraL — By all means.

Mr. Bodkin.— Yom said, I think, that the abdominal viscera were the first parts eza^
mined? Yes. — Did you find them in a perfectly healthy state ? Yes. — Were they taken
out of the body? Yes.— Did jou examioM the liver? YcSi-^Was that heakhy? Yes.
—The lungs ; in what state were they ? They were heakky ; tfaeie was hleiod in them* —
Was there more t^ood than can be accoonted for by gravitation ? No ; I ftink net.^—
Did you notice some appearanee at one end of the stomach ? Yes.— Before we 90 te that,
did you examine the hintd ? Yes. — In what stale did yon find the brain ? It was ^nite
heahhy. — Was there any extravasation of blood on the brain ? Nei->-Any semm f Nok
— Was there anything in the appearance of the brata that in your judgment would cause

imSD DAT, lUr 16; 18j&«. 97

inmatanl pressnn ? Noj— Did joa <iTiiiiif Ae kort ? Tbt IwMt was euklnciM, ttKt
contained no blood. — Did tliat appear to yom to ba the rcGalt of diaease^ or of any aetion
of die system ? Not from diseaae, but from some ac|ioiK< — ^What kind oi ftctioa do you
attribole tbat to ? Spasmodic action* — Yo« say die stoomch was token oat ? Yes. — I
think you said ^ou noticed some appearance at one eud of the stomach. Yes.-~Be kind
enough to describe it ? Tkerp were namerons smaU yellowifih-white spots about the sise
of mustard-seed. — ^Whereabouts were those ? At the larger end of the stomach ? — Would
those appearances in jour judgment at all account for death ? No. — What would their
effect he on the health of any one ? I doubt whether they womld haTe tny «ffoc^^^If
they produced any effect on the health of the patient, what would it be ? 1 think they
may have been mucous follicles^ nothing more. — If it had any effect, in what way would it
affect the health ? I doubt whether it would affect the health. — Did you examine the
kidneys? Yes. — In what state were they? They were full of blood; blood that bad
gTETitated. — Since death? Since death. — Any appearance of disease? No.— Did you
find the blood in a fluid state ? Yes. — Is that usual ? No. — In what cases do you expect
to find it so? In some cases of sudden death. — Are they of fi'equent occurrence, or
lare? Rare. — Do you mean that the finding blood in a fluid state is a rare circumstence
eyenfii cases of sudden death? \ Yes. — I will ask you generally whether about the wliole
body jou observed any appearance of disease that would at all account for death ? No ;
iiOQe.— I belieTC on this occasion the spinal marrow was not very closely examined?
There was no appearance of organic disease. — The lower part of the spinal cord was not
on this occasion minutely examined ? No ; it was not. — Did you examine the upper
part? Yes. — ^What appearance did that present? A perfectly natural appearance. — I
beGeye, on a snbsequeat day it was thought right to exhume the body, that you might
examine the spinal cord with more attention ? Yes. — ^On what day was that doi^ ? I
believe on the 25th of January.

The Attomey^General. — Here is the t^port

Mr. Bodkin. — Did you make a report in writing of that second examination ? Dr.
Monkton did. — Was the lower part of the spinal cord then minutely examined ? It was,
-The whole of it? Yes.

Lord Camfbbix. — Is the report here ?

The AUomey-€lw9r€U. — Thfi report is made by Dr. MonktOB ; did yoii n*ke a nport
«a this mattes ? It waa vqmM jointly.

Mr. ^oiArn.— Then look at it. {The Report was handed to the toitness.)

Loid CAHPBBiJ[..^b tiiait a true atetemcut of ^hat yon then obserred? Yes.-^Will
yoQ read it ? " The Report of the examination of the spinal cord of the exhumed body
of John Parsons Cook, Esq." {^«ad the M^rt,)

Mi. Bodkin, — Are you still of opinion. Dr. Harland^ that there was. nothing in the
Appearances that you nave described to account for the death of the deceased? Yes. —
•^nd, as I understand you, nothing of an unusual kind that could not be referred to
changes that take place after death? Nothing.— -Now, I will call your attention to the
period when the stomach and intestines were removed from the body on the first exami-
nation; when they were removed, were they separately emptied into ajar? Yes. —
Were they afterwards placed in the jar ? Yes. — Now, do you remember who were engaged
in the removal of tfce stomaeh and intestines from the body into the jar ? Mr. Devon-
«hire and Mr. Newton.

Lord Campbell.— They were the only two who operated ? Yes.

Mr. B^dknK — Did you notice at that partiouJbr period where tlie priaoner was standing ?
Yes.— Where ? He was standing at the right of Mr. Newton.— Did you observe him do
anything when the stomach and intestines were being placed in the jar ? I observed,
while Mr. Devonshire was opening the stomachy a push was given to Mr. Newton ; ha
pushed Mr. Newton on to Mr. Devonshire.— The push was given by whom ? By Painter,,
and he' shook a portion of the contents of the stomach into the body. — -Waa anything said
by anybody on that ? I said, '^ Do not do that."

iord Ciai»pBUb.^^Yoii. addressed jhim ? 1 thought a joke was passing among them«r
andlsaid, ''Do 04^ do that" to the whoile.

Mr. Jtaittmr-«>Waa aoiythmg said on that obserradon of jowtn by either of them?
No.— Jttight k noti hiiva \nma accident ? 1 saw Mr. Palmer was close f them.^ — Might it
Bot imvo baen by sohm oiher person besides him? There was no one near hot hiasi^ —
Whit did yoa. wbesma f i observed, when Hir. Ne^on and Mr. Devonehkre were
pasM together, Pahner was Waning oiver in. that w«y at the same tine, aad Palmer was
auilng at the . time.^— After this imerruption, did the opening of the stomach proceed ?
^^--Was ift foond to- eontai& aaything particular? It contained a few ounces of

88 TRIAL OF WILLIAM PALMER.

brownish liqaid.— About how many? I sliMild think, about two or three ounces.—
Nothingparticnlar in that? No. — Wsa that said in the hearing of ^e persons there,
that there was nothing partieular found in the -stomach? Yes. — ^Who stated that?
Palmer himself.-^He was looking on ? He was looking on. — Do you remember what he
said? He said, "They will not hang us vet/'— To whom did he say that? To Mr.
Bamford. — Was that observation of his after somebody had said anything about the
stomach, or as mere observation upon it himself? As mere observation upon it himself.
— ^Then, the stomach being emptied, it was emptied into the jar? Yes, it was emptied
into the jar.— What was done with the stomach itself? Put into the jar also.

Lord Campbell. — The brownish liquid was found in his stomach? Yes.

Mr. Bodkin, — ^Were the intestines then examined ? Yes. — ^Nothing particular found,
in them, I suppose ? No, thev were contracted ; they were very small. — Were they, the
viscera, placed in the jar with' their'contents as they were taken from the body ? Yes.
— What then was done with the jar? It was tied over with two bladders and sealed. —
Did you tie them and seal them ? Yes. — And after you had so done, where did you
place the jar? On the table beside the body.^Dld you notice where Palmer was at the
time you placed the jar on the table ? He was moving about. — Moving about the room ?
Moving about the room. — Did you miss the jar from where you had placed it on the
table ? Yes, in a few minutes. — During that time your attention had been called away
by the examination ? Yes. What did you say or do on missing the jar from the table ?
I called out, " Where is the jar?" and Palmer from the other end of the room said, ** It
is here." — ^Did he say anything more ? — He said, " I thought it more convenient for
you to take away." — Is there a door at that end of the room ? Yes. — How near was
Palmer to that door? Within a very short distance. — How near? A yard or two, I
should think. — How far from where you were, where the body was? The distance
about half across this court.

The Attorney-General, The plan shows it quite accurately ; this makes it quite plain
(a plan was handed to the witness),

Mr. Bodkin, Look at that plan, and tell us if it accurately represents the room of
which you are speaking? Yes. — Are the dimensions given there; is there a scale?
There is a scale of feet. — Can you tell me how many feet it was from where you were to
the place where Pakner was ? By this scale, I should think about 24 feet. — ^Will yoa
mark it with pencil on the plan where you were? I was about the centre of the
place.

The Attomeif'0€neral,-^lf this evidence is of any value, it is material we should have
the precise position.

Mr. Bodkin, — By the same scale can you tell us how far he was from the door ?

The Attomey'General, — It does not turn on the distances, it turns on the position.

• Mr. Bodkin, — Is the door of which you are speaking, near which Mr. Palmer was,
the door at which you had entered ? No. — ^Do you know where it opened to ? No j I
see it here.

The Attorney-General,^'^ Q know that from another witness.

Mr. Bodkin, — On his calling this out did you go and take possession of the jar ? He
brought it to us. — You called to him to bring it to you ? Yes-^-What did you say ? I
said, "Will you bring it here? " I also went to the other end of the table, and met him.
nearly half way. — ^He was coming with it ? He was coming with it-r-Was the Jar then
in the same state in which it was when you placed it on the table? No.— What had
been done to it? There was a cut through both bladders. — How long a cut? Hardly akx
inch long. — Had that been done with some sharp instrument ? Yes.— Did you examine
the cut to see whether any of the contents of the jar had passed through it ? Yes. — Was
it quite clean? It was quite clean. — ^When you found this cut had been made in the jar,
did you make any inquiry about it ? Yes. — What did you say ? I saM, ** Here is.a cut ;
who has done this ?-~Did you sav that aloud so as to be heard by all the persons tfiere f
Yes. — ^Did anybody answer? Ves; Palmer, and Mr. Devonshirei and Mr. Nekton
seemed all to say they had not done iti~^I believe nothing more was said about it iken ?
No.— When you were about to remove the jap from the room did the 'prisoner put any
question to you? Yes. — ^What did he e«k you ? He asked me what I was going t> do
with the jar ; I siud I should take it to Mr. Fitore.— ^Did he say sBjtthinff on that? H^
said, ** I would rather you take it wil^ you lo Stafford, if you wmild take it thate"'-^
What did you say ? I then took it to Mr. Frere.— Did you make him any aoswer ? Nd;
I believe not, not that I rema(Bber.~-He said he would ratfaer you* take it to Stafiford fckau
to Mr. Frere's; did you say anything to that? I do not remember that I did-^^lhen
-^ou did take it to Mr. Frere's housed* Yesv— After idoing so did. you xetum jto /the TdUiot

TfilBD DAT, IUt 16, 1856. 89

Anns ? Yes.~Do you remember to wKom yoa gave the jar at Mr. Frero's ? I lelt it in
Mr. Frere's hall.-*Tied and leaied in the -way you have told ns ? Yes.
Mr. Baron Aldermn.-^How ^d they get rid of the slit ?

Mr. Bodkin, — Was there anything done in respect of the dit ? Yes, I immediately
cut the strings and replaced the bladders, and tied them separately again, so as that the
Blit was not at the top. — Was that before yon left ? Immediately on getting the jar
again from Mr. Palmer I did that— Before yon took it to Mr. Frere ? Yes.— Did yon
re-seal it ? Yes.— Did yon see that jar again before yon left Rugeley that day ? No. —
When yon got to the Talbot Arms, I understand the prisoner's house is immediately
opposite to you ? Yea. — ^Did you see him when you got there ? Yes.— How ? 1 went
into the ywid to order my carriage, and whilst waiting for it he came to me. — ^He came
across? He came across. — What did he say to you? He asked me what I had done
vith the jar; I told him that I had left it with Mr. Frere; he mquired what would
be done with the jar. — What did yon say ? I said it would go either to Birmingham or
London that night — For what purpose ? For examination. — Did he make, any observa-
tion npoB that ? I do not recollect — I think I understood you to say that you, nfter the
slit Jiad been discovered, unpacked the jar and re-covered it ? Yes. — Did yon tie each
cover separately ? Ye8.-*-With separate strings ? Yes. — ^Did you seal it with your own
Kal ? Yes. — ^iJnring this post-mortem examination were there any persons there, friends
<^ the prisoner, on his benalf I mean ? No, I think not ; there were several Rugeley
persons there. — ^Were there any parties there on the occasion of the second examination ?
Yes.— On the part of Pahner ? Yes.

{The Court adjourned for a short time,')

Cross-examined by Mr. Serjeant Shee,
You said that on the morning of the post-mortem examination, by which yon mean
the first examination, Palmer saw you, and said he was glad you had come to make the
post-mortem examination, as somebody might have come whom he did not know ? Yes. —
Were yoa on terms of intimacy with him then, or only an acquaintance? Merely an
acquaintance. — Occanonally, I suppose, practising at Rngeley, and known as a physician
m pmctiee in that neighbonrhood ? Yes. — ^You say in ^ course of the examination
Palmer said. *• They will not hana us yet " ? Yes.— Did he not address Mr. Bamford
▼hen he said that ? At first.— Did he not say, '* Doctor, they will m>t hang ns yet " ?
He mi^t do so.— Was it not so ; ** Doctor, they will not hang us yet ;" do not you think
^t was it? I am sure he said ** They will not hang U8."--Wa8 he not addressing Mr.
Bamford, and did he not say, ** Doctor, they will not hang us yet " ? He first addressed
Mr. Bamford in a loud whisper ; afterwards he repeated the same expression loud before
several persons. — You had said to him you understood there was a suspicion of poison-
ing ? That I had heard it. — Now of the first post-mortem examination you drew up a
^*port? Yes. — ^Did you draw it up on the day or the evening of that post-mortem
examination ? They were merely notes I wrote at the time the post-mortem examin-
ation was going on. — Is the paper which was shown to you just n^w, and which we were
toM Dr. Alfred Taylor had had in his possession, the very notes? No, those I wrote as
toon as I got home ; I wrote in pencil. — Where are those notes? Those I destroyed at
the tioie.-«#*Yoa wrote the other aa soon as you got home from the pencil-notes ? Yes. —
How came they into the possession of Dr. Alfred Taylor ? I do not know.—- Bnt what
dui you do> with them ? I sent them to the fhther4n-law.-*-To Mr. Stephens? Yes.—
When did you send them to Mr. Stephens? The same night; on the evening of the
«fty.— And you have not seen them since, I presume, until to-day? No.— Were they
^odueed on the occasion of the inquiry before the Coroner? I did not see them.-*-
^ow as to the second report, who did you give that to? Dr. Mookton took that with
himf I do not know what became of it.— On tiie occasion of tiie first examination you
^y yoa observed follicles under the tongue ; are those pustules? Not under the tongue,
on the tosflnie.*^Ara they pustules? No.— What are they? They are large mucous
^icie^^NotebntainiDg matter ? No.^Is it a sort of thickening, then, of the skin ?
Of the mucous follicles at the base of the tongue. — Did they appear to be of long standing ?
Yes.x- Were. I^ey numerous ; were there many of them ? • Yes, many.— Do they indicate
t^ tiiere had been much aoreness there, do you think ? I have no doubt they would
produce inconveiuence.-*In your judgment would they probably have given pain in the
ordiuuy use of the month in eating and speaking? I doubt whether they would; I
think they must give some degree of pain, bnt I should think slight.— Are they anything
in the oatare of enlarged glajuls from the irritation of disease? No.^Will you under-
j<^ to say ^ey were not enlarged glands, glands enlarged W the irritation of disease ?
I do aotbelieve they were ^ I h«tve seen them frequently.'^ You say that the lungs were

90 TRIAL OF WiLLLAM PALMER.

htsitby too ? Ye8.*-^Do you adhere to that? Yes.— Did not Mr. De'vonUuse^ in jonr

presence^ express a contrary ojpinion, and say they were •nhefthhy ? He said he thought
there was amphycena, congestion of the lungs. — u noi anphycena a disease ? It is not
a natural state ; it is very constant in persons who are supposed to be in health. — ^You
mean supposed to be in health nntil they die and their bodies are examined ? Not die
with that disease.— Is it not a diseased state of the lungs ? Yes. — Does it not consist in
some 6<Mrt of the air-cells being full of some description ? Distension of the air-celts.

Lord Caxfsekl. — It ia an abnormal state of the lungs? Yes, it k.

Mr. Serjeant 8kee.—The longs you say were full of blood? Yes^— The heart empty?
Yes. — Did you examine the white s^ts cm the wider part of the stomach? Yes. — ^Uow
did you examine them? By removing the mneuB that was eo the sarfaee of the stomach
with the finger or aealpel ; I bad no lens, ao glasa.— You would have been glad to have
had one when you discovered those symptoms, weuld you not? I should hikve examined
them with a lens if I had had one.— Was your examination of those appearances satis-
factory to you without a lens ? Yes.r-~Now you said or reported, for I have it down, that the
brain was healthy ; what sort of examinatioa did you n&ske of the biain ? The brain was
earefnliy taken out; the external part was first of aU examined; the membranes were
first examined, and slices were taken off liom the apex to the base of the hraa&. — Of what
thickness were those slices ? This sliees.— -About what thiekness ; I am told that that is
of importance ? I should think a^quarter of an inch.— Now is that as thin as it should be
to make a full ezaminatton ? I think that that would show any disease if there was any :
if there had been any appearunce of disease we should have examined that part more
carefully ; there was no appearance of anything unhealthy. — You have told us you did
not examine the lower part of the spinal cord at the first post-mortem examination ; how
far down did you examine it in the first instance ? As &.r down as we possibly could :
I requested Mr. Devonshire to cut the spinal cord as far down as he could, so that we
might examine, and I said, if Uiere is any appearance of disease, we might then open the
canal.

Lord Campb£lx*j— Did you find any appearance of disease? We found no appear-
ance.

Mr. Snjeant Shee,^Aft»r all, how far down did you examine it? Down to about tba
distance of the first v«rtehBa.~-auppo6iDg you had discovered a softening of the Sfuital
eord on that occasien> after a fuU examination of the spinal oord, might not that li«ve
been in your judgment sufficient to aeoount for the death of Mr. Cook? Ne.*-*-^ot if yom
had ibuad it, having opened and exandned the spinal cord and ^Biuid a softening ; in
your judgment that wonld net have been sufficient to account for his death? Certeinfy
not ; softening would not produce tetanus at all ; it might produce paralysis.— Do act you
think in the case of a man ^dying by convulsions, in order to ascertain with any de^reee
of certainty what the cause of his death might be, it was necessary Portly after his death
to make a earefui examinatimi of the sinnal cord ? It was afterwards thought desirable. —
In order to aseertain with any degree of certainty or ressonabie satis&ction, do not you
think as a medical ma» it was necessary shortly after the death of the deceased earefully
to examine the spinal eord ? No, I do not.— Do you knew who suggested it should be
examined more than a mouth after death ? The 2&A of Deeember was the first.r^lt was
in January the seoimd examination took place ; supposing there had bees a. softentngy do
not you think, in ooder to discover it, it was necessary to examine the spinai eerd at an
earlier period after death than two months ? if there had been a aofl w iing it would have
been detected at the second examination; the body remaining unexamined fnr a long time
would not fMToduce hardening of the sfnne.— That is your opiniou; mi^t not any sc^teiH
iug you observed at that late period be the result of decomposition ? The spine was very
little soft indeed. — Were there some appearances of decompoeitioB upon it? Yes. —
Might not that materially interfere with your examinatioD for the purpose of aseer*
taining what the condition of it had been at death ? I think not— In the examsnatiou
<>f a spinal cord is it not constantly neeessso^ to use-a mieroecope even shortly mfyer deafth
in order to discover if there had been any iesien of the parts? I d»aot know that it i&r-
Did you make any minute examination of the gianales of the spinal cord ? Yes^ I ex*
amined them carefully. — In what way ? With my finger, and with the ^e. — With any
microscope ? No. — ^Did you examine him to see if thoe was any disease on htm of the
venereal kind ? Yes.-— Did you observe any ? There w«s a loss of substance.

Lord Cavpboux.— Was that from any disease on him at the time of hie death, or firan
some past disease ? From past disease.

Mt". Sefp'eani Shee. — Cbuld you form an ophnon of how long that had been ago? It
was cicatrised over, and on the cicatrix there was a small abrasion.— Then it must harre
been in a sore state? The excoriation might be a little 8ore.—Waa it extensive ? No;

THIRD DAY, Mat 16, 1856. » 91

Ttt7 smalL— But an «fai woond? It mm a men ^lOQrarttMi; merdxa Ihde of 4«
&Ee(»>iBtioii nUed off.

Be-examined by the Attomey^Cfeneral,

Were there any chancres? There were no chancres.— Nothing beyond what voa
would term an excoriation? No.— Except the cicatrix from the old disease? — Yes.
Now I will ask you these questions; yon are a physician, and competent to answer them:
would chancre, even in its most positive and active state, produce tetanus ? No. — ^Was
such a thing ever heard of, to your knowledge ? I never heard or read of such a thing. —
You examined the throat; was there any symptom of ulcerated throat? No. — Any
appearaaee of anything syphilitic theie ? None whatever. —Again, I ask, have you ever
heard or read of an ulcerated or ^philitic throat producing tetanus and death? No,
never. — At to thoae follicles on the tongue, to what eavse do yoa ascribe those; what
oonditioa of body produces those ? I think often a disordered stomachi. —Are they of any
senotts comeqoenQe to health ; would they in any way aocoant for death in this form ?
No. — ^Yeu have been asked about the state of th« lunss ; there was amphyeeoa theve;. that
is, an ondae quanti^ of blood in die aiar->ves6els ? YeB, — Could tiiat have any connexion
with this death ? No. — Mr. Devonshire made some observation with regard to there being
a congestion of the longs? Yes.— Did that appear to you a state of disease which might
have existed in the longs before death, or was it due to the gravitation of blood after
death ? I believe it is due wholly to the gpravitation of blood after death. — Supposing yoa
were wrong in that view, was there anything in the lungs which could account for deatk?
Nothing. — ^The heart, you say, was empty ? Yes. — ^But, if I understood you, in your
examination in chief you smd the heart in other respects was healthy? Yes. — And
the emptiness of the heart yoa ascribe to spasmodic aetion ? Yes.* — ^When tiie heart is
empty of its contents, lifo cannot go on? Certainly not. — That would be something
immediately concomitant with death? Yes. — You heard the spasmodic allection of this
mam's body prior to death described by Mr. Jones yesterday? Yes.— Would those
synaptoms account for the exhaostion of the fluid contents of the heart? Yes^ I believe
the ^asms in the muscles generally also extend to the heart.?— Is there any other cause to
which you. can trace the emptiness of the heart except the spasmodic actiOQ described
yesterday by Mr. Jones? Yes.— The fluidity of the blood of whidi yoa spofes, that is
race even in cases oS sudden death ? Yes. — Did you ever hear or know of fluidity of the
Uood ia any other case than that of sudden death? I havo read in cases of pMsoaing ^
blood is sometimes fluid. — What description of poisoning ? Arsenie and strychnine toow—
Now, first, as to the white speAs on the stomach, they were quite visible to the naked eye ;
you had not a lens to examine them 2 I had not ; they were visihle. — ^Had you any difl^
cnlty in aseertaining their extent* atnd what they w^ e ? No.— With regaed to the braia,
whether the slices you took off were sufficiently large or not, was there SDything i& the
brain to indicate the presence of any disease or not ? Nothing whatever. — Supposing
them had been^ did you ever know, or hear, or read, in the cowse of your studies^ of any
diseased state of the brain oocasioning death by tetanus ? No.— You. were also asked witb
regard to the examimition of the Sfamd cord ; was there any relaaation in the spinal cord
that would at aU account for thtase syinptcmis attending the death ? No, nothing.*- Was
there any relaxation of it at all ; had death produced any amount of relaxjation there?
No. — In your opiaiony supposittg you had examined the state of the spiaal cord imme**
diately or recently i^ter death, would you have been able to make a better examinatioa of
it than you did when you did examine it ? Not at all. — la there any disease of tlie spinal
cord with which you are acquainted which produces tetanusai^ that form of death ? No ;
sometimes with inflammation of the membranes of the spinal cord there is tetanus ; but
there were no appearances, of inflammation whatever. — To what do you ascribe the
granules which you found there ? It is not un^equeat in the dura mater for there to be
small granules that are called the glands^ and you may consider that these are sometiiing
of the same nature. — Is that a diseased condition or not? It is doubtful ; they are neveir
found in young persons ; Hney are almost alwajs found after adult age,-^li is hardly to be
called an abnoimal conrntion ? I believe every one has them ^ I never s&w a head without
them.

Mr. CHARLES JOHN DEVONSHIEE sworn,

liord CAxnnxx. — It cannot be necessary to carry Mr. Devonshire aK over the Ame

«aid?

Mr. JBSmkSmtonf^l do ant propose to do so, my Lord.

£xamiaed by Mr. HuddUston,
Axe yoa. an undergradnale of medicine of the Umversity of London? i am.— Were
jfrn, in Noveaadi>er lasty'st Dr. Monktoo^s at Bi^al^? Yes, — ^You vrnve asw ii lisg him?

92 TRIAL OP WILLIAM PALMER.

I was assistrnghim in his practice.*— Did you perform the postrxnortem examination on the
25th of November at the Talbot Hotel? I did.— In what state did you find ^the body?
The body was pale; there was a general pallor. — ^As to form how was it? The fingers
were clenched nrmly; the thumb of the left hand was thrown into the palm, the fingers
were clenched over. — Did you notice the mouth ? The mouth was a little contorted. —
Now, was the body generally stiff, or how ? Very stiff; perfectly so. — I believe you
opened the body? I did.

Lord Campbell. — Was it stiff beyond the usual stiffiiess of death ? Much more so^
my Lord.

Mr. ffuddlestotu — You opened the body, I believe ? I did. — In what state was the liver ?
It was very healthy. — Did you examine the heart ? I did. — In what state was that ?
The heart seemed healthy ; it was perfectly empty ; there was no blood. — ^Was it the
usual size? Yes, the natural size.— Did you notice the lungs? Yes, I did; they con*
tained a considerable quantity of dark fluid blood, and there were traces of amphycena'in
the left lun^. — In what state was the blood? Perfectly fluid. — Did you examine the
brain ? I did. — In what state was the brain ? I found it healthy throughout.— Did you
examine any portion of the spinal cord ? I examined a small portion of the spinal cord,
about a quarter or half an inch of it ; as far as I coold reach with a knife. — In what state
was that ? Perfectly sound and healthy. — Did you take out the stomach ? I did. — Did
you open it ? Yes. — What did you open it with ? With a pair of scissors. — Had you a
jar there ? Yes, I had. — As you were opening the stomach with a pair of scissors did
anything happen ? There was a pressure from behind, or a push, and I went a little forward ;
I did not pay any attention to it. — ^What was the effect of that ; did anything happen to
the contents of the stomach ? I cannot say any escaped. — ^What was done with the c<m-
tents of the stomach ; I believe you punctured the stomach? The anterior surface of the
stomach. — ^And some of the contents fell out ? A^spoonful went on the chair. — The
contents were put into a jar, and you saw that jar sealed by Dr. Harland ? Yes.— Did
you tie the stomach up where it was punctured before you put it in the jhr, with a piece
of string ? Yes. — You found nothing in the stomach and intestines, they were quite
healthy ? Quite healthy. — Did you go to Mr. Frere's that same day for the jar? I did.
— ^Did you find the jar there in the same state as you had seen it made up by Dr. Harland ?
I did. — ^And did you give that to Mr. Boycott, Messrs. Lander and Giurdiner's clerk ?
Yes, I did. — ^That was on Monday, the 26th ? Yes.— On the 29th did you open the body
again? I did. — ^I believe that was to get the liver and kidneys ? Yes, and the spleen. — >
Did you take them out of the body ? Yes, with some blood. — ^The liver, the kidneys,
the spleen, and some blood ? Yes. — ^What did you do with them ? I put them in a
stone jar. — Did you seal it up ? I put on it wash-leather and brown paper, and then
I sealed it. — ^Did you deliver that same jar in the same state on the 30th to Mr. Boycott,
the same person to whom you delivered the former ? I did. — In making the post-mortem
examination did you examine the penis ? I did.-> Did you see anything there ? Nothing
at all. — Was that in consequence of something that was stated by Palmer ? It was the
subject of his ^observation. — ^That was why you examined the penis ? Yes. — Did you
hear Palmer say something? Yes. — What was it he said? That "we should find
syphilis upon him ; that he had had syphilis and sore-throat" — In consequence of that
you looked at the penis ? Yes. — Did you find any chancre or anything of that sort ? I
saw nothing of the sort ; there was no hardness. — In consequence of that did you also
take out the throat? I did, but not in consequence of that. — Were there any marks of
ulceration or soreness there ? There were natural papillae ; but they were larger than
usual at the base of the tongue.

Cross-examined by Mr. Grove,

Tetamc convulsions are supposed to proceed from an affection of the spine ? Yes,
they do. — Is not that considered the proximate cause, some derangement of the spine ?
It is, and complaints that affect the spine. — A derangement, I believe, not always capable
of being detected by examination? Just so.— In examining the body of a person who
was supposed to have died of tetanus, would not the spinal cord be the first region locked
to ? You would look at the spinal cord. — Was any part of the spinal cord exterior to
the Aperture in the cranium examined on the post-moftem ? About half an inch. — What
is about the length of the whole spinal cord ? It depends upbn the height of the man. —
Were you present when the granules were discovered in a subsequent examination ? I
was not. — Do you know whether, although in certain cases there may be affection of the
brain and cord which do not produce death, in others «light granules have produced
death ? I do not exactly understand the question.- — Where you discover disorder, such
as granules pressing on the signal cord aear the dura mater,- would not this, in oertain

THIRD DAT, K4T 16, 1856. 93

cases, be conndered nifficient to aoeoant fbe deatk ? If they prodnced great initatio& and
pressure.— Bat in certain cases miglit they not prodnec death ?

Lord Camfbeix. — Have yon seen any case of that sort ? No.

The Attomey'GeneraJ. — Have yon been in practice at all ? For a short time. .

Mr. Babom Alderson. — When yoa have all the medical men in London here, yoa had
better not examine an undergraduate of the London University.

Be-examined by the Attorney^eneral.

At the time you were making this post-mortem, did you know that this man had died
of tetanus ? I was not certain ; there were hiuts thrown out that it was so. — But that
was all ? That was all. — You had no knowledge of the precise circumstances attendins;
the death? No, I had not.

Dr. DAVID HENRY MONKTON sworn.-— Examined by the Attomey-Gentral.

' Were yon present at the first post-mortem examination ? I was not. — ^Yon are a
physician, residing at Rngeley ? I am.— Qn the 25th of January did you take part in a
post-mortem examination of the spinal cord and marrow of the deceased man, John
nmns (jTook ? I made that examination. — ^Be so good as to describe the state of the
muscles of the bodjr as yon saw them ? Those of the trunk and neck were in a state of
^w'ty.— Was that, in your opinion, due to the commencing decay of the body or not, or
should you ascribe it to any other cause ? I should consider that the cause.— If I under-
stand -what you have ^st now said, that would not be inconsistent with the fiict of there
iuirmg been a great rigidity of those muscles at the time of death ? Certainly not.— How
^M 7^^ ^^ ^^ muscles of the arms and legs ? In a state of rigidity.— When you say
rigidity, do you mean rigidity such as exists after death, or greater than you generally
&d in dead bodies ? I should not say it was an unnatural amount of rigidity. — Was it
more than you would expect to find in an ordinary dead body, considering the length of
time that had elapsed since the death ? The rigidity was not more, the position was
peculiar ; that is a different thing.— Describe what you mean by saying the position was
peeoiiar ? l^e mnscles of the arms had partially flexed the fingers of the hands.^Was
iht position of the hand — those partial clenches I suppose I may call it — firm or not ?
Very firm ; it reqmred a considerable force to relax or open it. — How did you find the
feet? The feet were turned inwards much more than is usual.— Did you carefully
examine th« spinal cord ? I did. — Did ^ou hear the report read by the last witness ? I
'f^rote thftt report. — Was the condition m which that port of the body then was, such as
to enable yon. to make a satisfactory examination of it ? Certainly it was. — If there had
^^^^t prior to death, any diseased or abnormal condition of that part of the body, could
you have had any difilculty in detecting it ? I think not. — I am speaking of the part of
^e body to which you confined your examination, the spinal cora and marrow ?
£xaet]y. — Was there any diseascMl condition of it ? No, no disease. — ^The report ^aks
of certain granules which' you detected? It docs.— To what do you ascribe those
grannies ? It is difficult to give the origin of them. — Do you agree with the last wit-
ness that they are commonly to be found in persons after a certain period of life?
They are.

Lord Campbell. — Do they lead to a sudden violent death ? I believe not.

The Attorney 'GeTieraU — You never knew or heard of disease or sudden death being
produced from that cause ? Never. — I understand you to say the report which has been
read contains your opinion on the stibject? Fully.

Cross-examined by Mr. Serjeant Shee,.

What did yon do with that report ? On the 2nd of *lPebruary I gave it into the hands
of Mr. Gardiner. — ^That is the attorney of Mr. Stephens? Yes. — You have not seen it
«Hwe ? No, not before to<lay.

JOHN BOYCOTT sworn.— Examined by Mr. Wekhy,

Are yoa elerk to Landor, Gardiner, and Landor, solicitors, at Rugeley ? I am. — On
^ 26th. of last November did you receive a jar from Mr. Devonshire? I did. — Was it
<iovered with brown paper, and sealed up ? It was. — Did you take it to London ? I did.
—Did yon deliver it in the same condition to Dr. Alfred Taylor, at Guy's Hospital? — On
^ next day I did. — In the same condition ? Yes. — ^Afterwards, on the 30th of November,
did you receive another jar from Mr. Devonshire at Dr. Monkton's house ? I did. — Did
you bring that up to London also ? I did. — ^And deliver it in the same condition to
Dr. Taylor ? I did. — Were you present at die inquest on the body of Cook ? I was not.
^Did yon fetch Mr. Newton to be examined at the inquest ? I do not think I did ; I
did not.— When you were on yoor way to London on Tuesday last, at the Kugeley station.

94 TRIAL (» WiXiUM PALMES.

did Mr, Newton et>ine and make a eantamaoAva io yo« ? Se did«-«*]fid htttaik Jo see

Mr. Gardiner ? No ; he knew Mr. Ciapdiner was out

Lord Campbell. — ^He made a «omnnaiieaiion to yon aa Mr. Gaidioer's cleik? Tes.
Mr. WfUbf, — ^Wfaenyon got to J>ndon did you take liim to Mr. Gardiner ? I did. —
Did you hear him make the same observations to Mr. Gardiner ? Yes, I did.
Lord Campbell. — ^Will you put any questions to tlus witneaiy brother Shee ?
Mr. Serjeant Shee, — ^No, I do not, my Lord.

JAMES MYATT, swom.->Examined by Mr. James.

*" In November last were you postboy at the Talbot Arms at Rugeley ? Yes. — Do you
remember Mr. Palmer, the prisoner ? Yes. — Do jon remember Monday, 26th of Novem-
ber last ? Yes. — ^Were you ordered on that evening to take Mr. Stephens to the Stafford
station ? On the Monday night— About what time did yon get the order to take
Mr. Stephens to the Stafford station ? It was a little after 5. — ^Now, be&re you started
did yon go home to get jour tea ? Yes. — On returning from yoar tea to the Talbot
Arms did yon meet the prisoner ? Yes. — Did he speak to you ? Yes. — What did he say
to you? He asked me if I was going to drive them to Stafford: Mr. Stephens. — ^What
did you say? I told him I was. — What did he say to you then? He asked me if I
would upset them. — Was anything ssdd about a jar ?

Mr. Serjwsd 8hee» — Let us have what he said.

Mr. James.-^It is a perfectly legitimate question. — ^Was any thi»g said about a jar?
He said he sappesed I was going to take ihe jars. — What did you say then, or what did
he say ? I said I beBeved I was. — After yon said yon believed yon were, what did he
say ? He says, ** Do yon think yon eonid upset them?" — What answer did you make ?
I told him, '* No.**— Did he say anything more? He said, if I icould, Ihere was a 102.
note for me. — ^What did you say to that ? I XsAA. Inm I shooU not.-*4>id he say any
more to you? I tdd him that I must go, for the horse was in the fiy waiting for me to
start. — Before that was said, do yon rawmber whether he said anythmg more about tiie
jars ? I do not necolkect — Did he say w^ he wanted you to upset them ; ifid he say aay
more to you about it ? you must tell the whole truth here. Not any more aboat Ihe jars.
—Did he say cmy more at ttet tume to you ? Yes. — You must tdl tire whole. I told
him if I did not go there was soarabody else would go ', he told me not to be in a hurry.
— Yon must tell tiie whole of what he said to you. He told me not to be in a hurry, for
if any one else went he would pay me. — Did he say more to you that eveninff ? I do n^
recollect.— Did you see him the next day ? I saw him the next morning. — Did he speak
to you? When I was going to my breakfast. — Do you pass his house to goto your
breakfast? Yes.— Did be speak to yon? Yes. — ^Wfaat did he say to you? He asked
me who went.— Who went with the fly? Yes.— What did you tell him? I told him
Mr. Stephens and I believed it was one of Mr. Gardiner^s clerks. — Then what did he say
to that ? did he say anything when you told him that? He said he believed it was : I
do not recollect anything more.

Cross-examined by Mr. Serjeant Shee,

You say he asked yen whether you were going to drive them to Stafford : what eon-
versation was there between you and him before he used the words " going to drive them
to Stafford" ? I had not spoken to htm before. — How do you know what he meant by
''going to drive them to Stafford*' ? I knew I was going to take sotaie one to Stafford. —
But did he use the words " going to drive them to Stafford" ? Them was the words, I
believe. — Did he use the name *' Stephens" ? Mr. Stephens'aname was mentioned. — Was
it mentioned before he used these words to yoo, asking yon if you were gomg to drive
them to Stafford? I do not recollect.— How do yom know he mefitiGned " Stephens*' ?
He mentioned Mr^ Stephens afterwards. '

Lord Campbell. — ^Did he mention Mr. Stephens that evening? Not at first. — But
in the course of that conversation ? Yes.

Mr. Serjeant Shee. — How near were you to the Talbot Arms? Between 800 and 400
yards.— Had you been preparing a fly ? I did not prepare the ^^ the fly was prepared
while I went to my tea. — ^Was there any other gentleman at the Talbot Arms at tiie time,
nny visitors besides Mr. Stephens and his party ? I cannot say ; there might be. — You
understood the word ** them " to mean Mr, Stephens and his party ; was that what yon
say ? Yes. — ^Were not these the words Palmer used: ** I should not mind giTing 10/. to
break Mr. Stephens's neck " ? I do not recollect him saying " to break his neck." — Were
they not words to that effect, ** I should not mind giving 10/. to break his neck**? I do
not recollect that.— Then *• 10|. to upset him"? Yes. — ^Those were the words, were
they? ThCTi were the words, to the best of my recollection.— Did he appear to hare

s

TSIKD DAT, 3l4Y IB, 1656. 05

been dzinkiiig atlbe tiiii«? I eaim«t mt. — 'Whm he nid ''to iipset hhn/' did he use
any epithet; did he describe him in aaySrmy, sach as ** upset tiie fellow " ? He did not
descril)e iuin in any way. — Did he sa;^ anything about him at die time ? He did say
something about it ; it was an humbug^ng concern, or somethiae to that effect. — ^That be
was an hambugging concern, was that it ? No. — ^That it was a humbugging concern, or
something to that effect ? Yes. — Did he say anything more on the subject, that he was a
sospieioiis, troublesome fi^ow ? I do not recollect faim saying anydiing of that. — ^Did he
speak angrily of him, in an angry tone ? I cannot say that he cBd.— I^d not describe
him in aoy^way ? No more than that. — He gave you no notions, from what he said, of
▼hat reason he had to complain of him ? No. — ^Do not you ooUect from what he
said he had been yery trovblesoae and saspiciMB ? He dsd aot aay anything diiout

Re-examined by the Attomeif^GeneraL

My friend has put the words to you in a somewhat diiSerent fbnn ; )u8t let tbc haT«
your words over again ; give it yoar own way ; what was it Palmer said to yon when he
saw you there in the street ? He asked me if I was going to dirre Iftiem to'Staffivd ? I
told himl belieyed 1 was. ** Was it lir. Stephens i was going to take?" I said '* I
beUered it waa." — What did you say then ? He supposed 1 was poinsp to take the jars ;
I told him I was; he asked me if I would upset them? I told him I should not: if I
irooid, he said, there was a 10/. note for me. — What part of the conyersation was it at
Thich he said it was a humbugging conoem ? It was towards the middle of it. — ^Was it
Wore or after the had offeredyou the 10/. ? I cannot exactly say. — Do you recollect
whether it was before or after? I cannot recollect whether it was wfore or after. — ^Was

that all that was said, or do yon remember anything else? That is all I recollect at that

time.

I^rd Campbell.— Do you not know whether there was move than one jar ? {do

Mr. SAMUEL CHESHIRE sworn.— Examined by Mr. James,

I beUere you were for some years postmaster at Rugeley? I 'was. — ^You are now
from Newgate suffering punishment for hayii^ opened a letter as postmaster ? Hs;iring
nawi a letter. ^

Lord Campbell. — ^That was the crime for which you were punished ? Yes.

Mr. /ames.— You pleaded guilty to the indictment, did wou not ? I confessed my
pilt.— How long were you postmaster at Rugeley ? Upwards of eight years ; it would
^ye been nine years on the 5th of April of the present year. — ^Did you know the prisoner
William Palmer ? I did very well. — How lon^ had you known him ? We were school-
fellows together. — ^Were you in the habit of going to races with him at times ? I think I
J^as, about three times in my life ; three or four, I cannot say which.— And betting upon
^8 horses with him occasionally ? No, I never bet ; I newer made but one bet in my
^e.— However, you wefe intimate with him ? I was very intimate with him. — ^I believe
yoa went to Shrewsbury races with him in November, 1855 ? Yes, I did« — ^Wben
^d yoa return to Rugeley from Shrewsbury ? The same ev^nag at twenty minutes past
eight—Was it Tuesday- the 13th that you were there ? It was on a Tuesday.— The day
tl^tPolestar won? Yes.

Lord Campbell. — ^The day the handicap was run ? Yes.

Mr. James, — ^You returned the same day to Rugeley? Yes.— On Saturday the 17th
pd you go with the prisoner to see Mr. Cook at the Talbot Arms ? Yes, I did.— Was he
^ bed or sitting up, do you remember, at that time ? He was in bed. — ^Did you live at
«epostH>flke? Yes.— About hoV near was the post-office to Palmer's house? About
^ or 400 yards.-^On Tuesday, the 20th of November, did you receive any message
^m Palmer to go* to him ? On the Tuesday evening I did,— Do you remember about
^hat time ? I think it was somewhere between six and seven. — ^As part of the message
^«« anything said about bringing a stamp with you ? Yes, I was to bring a receipt-
*J*"ip with me. — ^In consequence of receiving that message did you go to Palmer's house ?
Yes, 1 did.— Did you take a receipt-stamp with you ? Yes, I called at James's the book-
filer's on my way, and purchased a shilhng's worth. — ^When you got to Palmer's where-
abouu did you find him ? He was in his sitting-room.— When yon got there what did he
J^y to you ? I waited a short time ; he said he wanted me to write out a cheque. — Did
je produce anything to ^ou ? He produced a copy. — From winch you ware to write?
*roin which I was to wnte. — ^Did you write it out ? Yea.

Lord Campbell, — You copied it ? I copied it.

^^ /oniM.— Did he tell yOu for what purpose he wanted it ? Yea, he said that it was
Btoti«y that Mr. Cook owed him.— Aa nearly a£ you remember what did you write in hi«
preseace?

06 TPJAL OF WILLIAM PALMER.

Lord Caxpbeli^— Was what yofa wrote left in Mr. Pftliiier*s poBseMion ? It was.
Lord Campbell (to Mr. James). — ^Then you can call for it.

Mr. James, — Yes, my Lord ; I am now asking what he wrote in Palmer's presence ;
there is a notice to produce it ; I can bnt do what I was dmng.
liord Campbell. — You cannot.

Mr. James. — ^Then, my Lord, I will trace it to his possesnon in a moment. (To the
loiinesa) Before you commenced writing it, did he give you any reason why he wanted
you to write it? He said Mr. Cook was too ill, am he said Wetherby would know his
writing. — Wetherby would know his (Palmer's) writing ? Yes.

Lord CAKPBELifc— He said, ** Wetherby would know my writing " ? Yes.

Mr. James. — Did he tell yon what he was going to do with it when you had written it?
He said he was going to teJce it over for Mr. Cook to sign. — ^Aiter you had written this,
did Palmer take it away with him ? I left it with him.

Mr. Attorney-General. — We know that it went out of his possession afterwards, and
therefore, perhaps, we ought to follow it.

Mr. WETHERBY swom.—Examined by Mr. James.
What are you? I am secretary to the Jockey Club ; that is one of my employments.
— ^Your establishment is in Burlington Street ? It is. — Do you keep a sort, of banking-
account with gentlemen, and receive stakes for them, and pay stakes for gentlemen irbo
have race-horses and run horses upon the turf? Yes. — Did you know Beirsons Cook, the
deceased ? I had an account of that kind with him.-— Cook 'had an alconnt with yon
rather? He had. — ^Did you know the prisoner, William Palmer? JSlightly ; yes, I did.
— Had he any account with y on ? No ; that is to say, he had no account oz that nature ;
no general account ; I occasionally paid and received money for him.-)

Lord Campbell. — He had no banking-account ? No banking-aceonnt. -

Mr. James. — The other is a species of banking-account, is it not ? It is. — On the 21st
of November, did you receive a cheque or order (we will prove the contents presently)
for a sum of 350^ ? I did.

Mr. Serjeant Shee, — ^What did you do with it afterwards ?

Lord CAMPBBLL.-->Let me take this down very exactly.

Mr. Serjeant Shee. — My Lord, he received a paper, which he afterwards did something
with ; then we must have the contents of it.

Mr. James. — It identifies it as being a cheque. (2b the witness) Did it come by post?
It did. — By whom did it purport to be signed ?

Mr. Serjeant Shee, — That you cannot regularly get, until you show what he did
with it.

Lord Campbell. — ^This is to identify it.

"Mj, James. — Did yon afterwards send that back the next day? Two days after.—
That would be on the 23rd ? That would be on Friday, the 23rd. — ^To whom *d yw
■send it back ? To Mr. Palmer. — ^The prisoner, at Rugeley ? Yes.

Mr. Serjeant SJiee.^-Bj post, I suppose ? Yes. — IMd you put it in yourself? No.

Mr. Serjeant Shee, — ^That stops you from going further. .

Mr. James* — No, it does not. (To the toitness) Where do you generally place yonr
letters for the post ? In Vigo-street.— I mean, in your office ? They are placed hi a box;
a list of them is kept, and near post time they are sent to the post-office.— Was ^sAb letter
taken away to be posted with the others? It was. — Ii^the ordinary course of yobr busi-
ness ? In the orduiary course. — Do you remember the amount for which the <>rdeir was ?
350/.

Mr. James (to Mr, Serjeant Shee). — Shall I prove the notice to produce ; I have the
witness here ?

Mr. Serjeant Shee. — I think^ my Lord, it is my duty to see that things are regularly
done in this matter.

Lord Campbell. — ^In a case of felony you cannot make any admissions.
Mr. JOHN BOYCOTT, sworn.— Examined by Mr, Jamts^

Did you serve a copy of these two notices to produce : one upon the prisoner, and the
other upon Mr. Smith, his attorney? I did. — ^When was it served ? On the ard of May :
I served them both ; one upon Mr. Smith, and the other upon Palmer persoaally.^Where
was the prisoner then ? In Stafford gaol.

Mr. James. — To go quite regularly, my Lord, the notice is, " To produoe a certain
check for 350/., of which the body is in the handwriting of Samuel Cbe^ire^ and the
signature purports to be in the handwriting of the said John Parsons Cook."

THIRD DAY, May 16, ia56. 97

Mr. wfrrHERBY ctlUd agiuri.

Mr. Serjeant /S7m;^.— You know the handwriting of John Parsons Cook? Yes. — ^Was
not Oat in his htaidwriting ? As fkr as I recolleet.

Mr. Attorney 'General. — We must first call upon yOu to produce it. '

Lord Campbell.— You cannot do that, brother,
Mr. Serjecmt &iee. — My Lord, we haye it not.

Lord Campbell. — ^That is all that yoa can say ; you do not prodnee it.
/ Mr. SAMUBL CHESHIRE called again.

Mr. Jame$, — ^As well as you remember, what was it that you wrote from tlie copy that

Palmer gave you? It was addressed to Messrs. Wetherby ; I really cannxH exactly caU

to mind the wording ; it was something to the effect, " Please to pay to Mr. William

Palmer the sum of 300/."^ — ^and I cannot recollect what the exact amount above the 3002.

was ; it was 300/. and odd — ** and place it to . my account :" I believe those were the

words.— Old you put any date to it, do you remember ? I cannot recollect that. — ^You

left it with him and went away ? Yes. — ^This was the Tuesday : do you remember seeing

Palmer again on the Thursday or Friday ? Yes, he sent again for me. — Do you remember

"wiueh day it was ? I cannot call to mind which day exactly. — Do you remember' hearing

of the death of Mr. Cook at the Talbot Arms ? I do.— Was it after that ? It was after

that— He sent for you again either on the Thursday or the Friday ? Yes.— Do you

remember about what time of the day he sent for ^ou? . It was in the evening ; that was

some time between 6 and 7.^— Did you go to him ? I did. — ^When you went to him

opion that evening^here did you see him ? I saw him in the kitchen. — ^In his kitchen ?

In his kitchen.— When you went in, did he go out of the kitchen and come back to yon

▼ith something in his hand ? Yes. — ^What was it that he retiimed with in his hand? - He

bad a quarto sheet of paper in his hand. — ^Did he give you a pen, and ask you to do some*

thing ? He gave me a pen, and asked me to sign it.

Lord CAMFaBLL.-^Was there anything written upon this quarto sheet of paper?
There

Mr. 7a»»«.— You asked him what it was ? Yes.-^What did he say ? He said, " You
know that Cook and I have had dealings together, aud this is a document which he gave
me some days ago, and I want you to witness it." — ^What did you say to him ? I said,
** What is it about ? " and he said, " There is some business that I have joined him in,
and which was all for Mr. Cook's benefit, and this is a document stating so," or some-
th&ig of that kind. — Did you look at the paper ? I just cast my eye over it. — What sort
of pap^ was it ? you said a quarto sheet ; just describe it ; you are a man of business ;
yoo. undemtsnd me ; what sort of paper was it ?

*Mr. Serjeant Shee, — He has said it was a quarto sheet ; do you want to get the cont^ts
ofit. .

Mr.' Jam«s.— I want an answer to a question which I am very properly putting. If
you have any objection to make I will argue it, and my Lord will decide it:

Lord Campbell. — You are quite right.

Mr. James, — ^Will you describe it ? It was post-quarto paper of a yellow description.
—Do jiot tell us at present what the contents were ; did you observe the writing ? Yes,
I did. — la whose writing was it? I thouj^t it was Mr. Palmer's own writing. — ^What
did you say when he asked you to sign it ? I told him that I could not. — Did jou give
any reason ? I told him that I should have to be called upon, perhaps, to give evidence in
the matter at some future day. — ^Did you say anything about Cook ? I told him that I
Had not seen Mr. Cook sign it, and I likewise told him that I thought the post-office
authorities would not like me to be called on to give evidence as to a document which
took place while I was absent. — You said that you had heard that Cook was dead on the
Tuesday night, thie 20th? I had.— Did you say anything about that? I do not believe
that I said anythinff with r^nwd to his death at the time ; in fact, I did not give my exact
reasons f6r not signing it.— When you refused to sign did Palmer say anything ? He
said that it would be no matter, and he dared say that they would not object to Mr.
Cook's signatm^.

Lord Camfbbll.— What did he say would be no matter ? That it did not matter my
signing-it.

Mr. Jamts. — What became of the paper? I gave it him back again.— Did you leave it
with hun ? ¥«• I did.— -And went away ? Yes.

Mr. James, — ^The notice to produce, my Lord, is in the same notice to produce: "And
also a oertain fAseet of paper produced and shown to the said Samuel Cheshire by you on
or about the Sind or 29tA of November, purporting to be an account of certain bill or

o

B8 TMAL X)F WiLLmM PALMCR. •

other transactions between the said Jkika Parsons Cook' ani' yourself, and receipt for the
same, and purpoiting to be signed by the same John. Panwis Coak." We call fbr.it^ it is
not produced. (To the witness) Did you sa^ that th«ro -waa a ataaip upon it, as fkr as
you remember ? I believe there was» — Did you., read, it ? I did not read it all ; 1 just
cast my eye down it. — To the best of your recollection can you mve any descripttion of it";
what It was ; what the contents of it appeared to you to be ?. It was to the effect that
certain bills, the dates of which with the amounts were quoted, but which I cannot recol-
lect now, were 'all fiir'M|:. Gofit's benefit and'no^ four: Mh Balmeifs-, I brieve- : those may
not be exactly the words used, but somethiBg- o& thai kind^s— W^ere the amounts large or
small, do you remember ? Rather large amounts. — Have you aoy recollection of them ?
I' recollect two ; one was 1000/. and one was 500/.— -Did you see any signature to it ? Yes,
there was ajiignature.

Lord Campbeix.:— Whkt name?. It waa either I. or J4 F. Cook; I cannot saj> whelbar
it was an I or a X

Mr, James. — ^Dory«^.i)emembeE whether itwas:"X..P. GOok/,' or.wbttherf Ihe wovda
** Parsons .Cook'* were written.?' I do not think it was " Pai!BOiisCoek.V — Ydnrsay yam.
knew Palmer very well; were you in the- habk of giving to>Pa)meF.lettec8'addre8iea to
his mother? Yfs;. in faet, he* has called' for- theoL — ^Was heii« the hahitof calliAgfor
letters addressed to his'metherf Yes.

Lopd CAMPBB£b.*--Did she reaidh at Rhgeley ? • She did.

Mr. James, — During the monthft of October and'November V905,' did you giv« him letters
addressed to his'mother? I cannot recollect that I did: — Try and remember?- I' cannot;
— Did yon give him any letter addtessed to Mr. Oook ? ' I. do not know^that ; Mr. Palmer
IBM taken Mr. Cook's' letters, aud'M^. Cook hafi taken Mr. Palm«r'fi letfters^ — Jusfattend-:
do vou remember the in^fiiest being held' on Mr; Cook? Yes,- I do.— It began on the
^!9m of November (we have the depositions here), and it ended on the 5th of December,
I think ; do you remember seeing Paliner while that ioqaest was going on ? Yes. — ^Did
he say aiKf thing to you about any letter coming* to 'Mr. GArdiner. frona Dr, Tdylec? He
came down to me on the Sunday evening and he asked me if I saw or hear»anythin^
freehw — Can you fix. the date of that Sunday at all ? I'know. it wsa the Sunday prenous
to the 5th of: December. — You knew, perhaps, that the inquest was adjourned to thei 5th of
December? Yes, I. did. — ^That would be the.Srd^ I am told: he asked you if yoa had
seen or hjeard:any thing frefsh? To let him know«-*^Whai'did you say tOi that ? I thought
that was a temptation for me to open a letter.

. Mr« Setjecmt Shee^^We cannot have what. he thonght/ {To thi tm^tiest) TVeil us wiiat
jou said ; you <need nbi tell us- what <yon . thought ? I' told ihiaik V coakirnot open a leitter.

Mr. James, — How came you to say that ?' I'cocdd net see wifat other infimBalteii' he
required. — What. did'ypu say to hinL; .youi told him yoii: ceidd. net x>pen a letter ? And
he told me that he did not want me to do anything to injure myself; I believe thatwai
about all .the oonyersation thattpassed.^At that tima? Y«s«^-Did haoome agun to-you? ,
I do not recollect; he did net — What was: the letter whieh. you read; which you are j
suffering punishment for ? It was a letter from Dr, Taylor to Mr. Gardiner. — To Mr.
Gardiner the solicitor? Yes. — You say you are suffering punishment for having read to
l^almer a letter f5^om Dr; Taylor to Mr; Gardfcier? Yes.— When did'you read that letter
to him ? I' did not read the- letter to him. — Whetr did you give him the letter to read?
I'did not give it him at all.— Wliat was ityoirdid? I merely told'Kim a ffew word^
of its contents.— Did you read it ?t I did not read- the whole- of 'the letter myselft^— Did

Jou read jart of' the letter fit)m Dr. Taylor? I read part of the letter.-— Aiid told
*almer the contents? Yes. — At least* a» much as you remembered? As muclr aal
Temembered.'

Lord CAMPBELL.— When ? It- was on the morning of the 5th of December.

Mn James, — Do you know Palmer's handwriting., well ? YeSf I think: I do. — Just
look at th^ {hanoUnff a letter to t?ie witness)?. Yes, I believathat to be^his; — Before I read
it, what did yon tell Palmer (Of the contents of that letter front /Dr. Taylor to Mr. Gar^neri
as^nearly as you.remember ? I told him that there were«iM. traces of strychaia feand»

Lord Campbell. — You told him that you found this in Dr. Tayloc'a letter? Yes,
no traces of strychnia .to be found.

Mr. James. — ^What else, as well as you remember ? I cannot recollect what else Ttold
him^ — Did he make any. observation: upon that 2 He said h^ kxkew4 itaif: would .not^ for
he was perfectly innocent.

Captain JOHN HAINES HAirTO;N>, swom.r-Bxeminedby mr^ James.
I believe ybai are chief Snperantendent of the. Police of. Staffordsbkre ? Chief Caa»
stable* — ^Did you obtain this letter (whidb I. have' jua^ pooved .to. be in Palmer^- hand-

THIBD DAY, Mat 16, 1B5IS. 99

WTitiDg)aDd envelope, from Mr. Ward the coroner.— Mr. Ward' handed. joie iihat letteri
I endorsed iU — 'You made your mmute at the timA ? IidUJU

Mr. Serjeant 8hee. — ^Letme just look at it (the same woi handed.ta^Mr. SIkjeant Shee^i -

Lord Oaicpbelc; — The fenaep witness has prored if.

Mr. Serjeant Shee^ — Just so, my Lord.

Mr. Straight— The envelope is addressed^ **W: "W. Ward, Esq., solicitor, Stafford;"

the letter is without date ; the signature may be " W. P.;" they are initials not very easy

to be read : '* My dear Sir, I am sony to tell yon that I fan still confined to my bed. I

do not think it was mentioned tit tl^ inquest yesterday that Cook was taken Ul on

Sunday and Monday night in th» same way as he was on the Tuesday night when hft

died. The chamhennaid at the Crown Hotel, Mastei^s'y can prove this ; I also believtt

that a man by the name of Fish^ ia coming down to prove he received some mMbeyat

Shrewsbury. Now here he could only pay SmIUi-10/«.out of 4U. he owed hinw Had

yon not better call Smith to prove this ? And again, .whatever Professor Taylor may

say to-morrow, he wrote from London last Tuesday night to Gardiner to say^ * We and

Dr. Rees have this dav finished our analysis, and find' no traces of either strychnia,

pnmie acid, or opium. What can beat this from a man. like Taylor, if he says what he

mt aiteaAy said^ and Dr. Harland^s evidence ? Mind you, I know and saw it in black:

and white what Taylor said to Gardiner, but this is strkstiiy pnvate and eonfidentiai, but

it is true. As regards his betting-book, I knew uothui^ of it, and it is^ no good to any

one. I hope the verdict to-morrow will be that he died of natuEal causes^ ana thua end

it. Ever yours," I thmk it is " W. P."

Lord Campbeu:*— The envelope.

Mr. Straight, — ^The envelope is addressed, " W. W. Ward, Esq., solicitor, Stafford." .

Mr. James (to Captain Hatton). — He was the coroner at the inquest ? He was. • •

Mr. SAMUEL CHESHIRE called again.— Cross-examined by Mr. Serjeant Shea.

You knew Cook well, I suppose ? I knew Cook v&cf well; I knew him from ahoat
September, I think ; that was the time I became intimate with him. — Did you ki|;iow his
handwriting? No ; I did not ; I had seen it ; but I could not telUif I were to see it jiow,
whether it was his own; I was not sufficiently acquainted with his handwriting, to be,
able to recognise if. — Not to be able to state your belief respecting it ; had you ever seen
him write? Letters ?.'r> Had you seen letters addressed to him? Y'es; Ihad»^Ybudo
not think you could speak to his handwriting ? I could not. — When you were talking
about the paper which Palmer asked you to sign, and when you declined to sign it^ dia
he say anything.? He said, ^* Oh I never mind ; I have no doubt they will not object. to
Mr. Cook's signature." — Touching the last portion of your examination ; he came to ypvk,.
jon said, and he asked you whether you had heard any^ing? Seen or heard anything.
— Was it "seen anything," or was not it, "have you heard anything^'? "Seen or
heard." — Are you sure that he said, " seen or heard ;" or was it not, "have you heard
anything" ? " Seen or heard."— Did you then say that you had heard something, but
that it would be wrong of you to tell him ? I told him that I had seen something.— But
that it would be wrong for you, to tell him ; did he then say, "What have you heard"?
He said, ** What have you seen?"— And then you said what you have already told us;
and did he not then say, ** I knew they would not, for I am as innocent as a baby" ?

Lord Cahfbeix. — He has already said that.

Mr. Serjeant Shee, — I am only asking the phrase, my Lord.

' I believe that was the phrase which he usedi— Do yon remember, on the Saturday
hiefore the death of Cook, being told by Palmer that he was very ill ?^ Yesy I do ; I
dined with him and Mr. Smith that- day. — ^Was Cook e£s;pected? He wafir; he should
have been one of the party. — Did Palmer say that Cook was very ill, and that, be must
call in Bamford? Yes.:— Had yoa seen Cook that day? I saw him in the evening. —
What state was he in then; was he unwell then? He was in bed. — Was he uaw«U>,
then ? I should suppose he was.

Mr. James, — ^What day was that ? It was on the Saturday.

Mr. Serjeant Shee. — Did you see Palmer at Rugeley on the Wednesd^, th^ second
day of the Shrewsbury Races? Yes; I did. — What time of the day ?. It was about mid*
day, I think.
^ Lord Campbsxl.^ — That would be Wednesday^ the 14th. .

Mr. Serjeant Shee^ — Did you see, him there on the Tuesday night ? I did not.

Be-examined by KEr. James, .

Abo«t how. lop^.does it take- to gO by -the train frDm.Staffeirdito ^irewsbury ? I can-

o 2

100 TRIAL OF WILLIAM PALMER.

noi say ; the trains ran so very badly from Rugeley. — Is it about an hour from Staflfbrd to
Shrewsbury ? More than that. — How much ? If the trains ran so as to meet each other,
I sjiould say it would take an hour and a half. — When you once start in the train from
Stafford, what is the duration of the journey from Stafford to Shrewsbury? From
Stafford to Shrewsbury a little upwards of an hour.

Mr. Serjeant Slice. — ^We do not make any question that he was there on the Wednes-
day evening ; that is not the object

Mr. ELLIS CRISP sworn.— Examined by Mr. Jcrniet,

Are you Inspector of Police at Rugeley ? I am. — On the 17th of December did you
assist in searching the prisoner's house ? I did. — The(« was a sale, was there not, of his
tilings on the 5th of January? There was.^Did you get this book there; was that at
Ae sale as his property (handing a book to the toitnesa) ? Yes.

Lord OAHPBELL.--Did you buy that book at the sale ? I did not buy it ; I took it
a*way at the sale ; I saw it being sold, and took it away.

Cross-examined by Mr. Serjeant Shee»

Where did you find the book ; you found it in his house, of course ? It was being
sold. — What I mean is, it was not put away or concealed in any manner? No. — It was
with other books ? It was brought out with a lot of books to be sold.

Lord Campbeli<. — ^The auctioneer had put it up for sale.
.' Mr. Serjeant Shee. — ^Were there other medical books ? Yes.

Mr. JOHN BOYCOTT called again.— r^e book proved by Mr, Crisp was shown to tht

witness,

Mr. Attorney-General. — Look at this book (handing another book to the icitness), and see
if it is the handwriting of Palmer ? I believe it is ; both of them.

Mr. Straight.— In this book (the first book) is written ** Strychnia kills by causing
tetanic fixing of the respiratory muscles."

Lord Campbell. — It ought to be known that there are various other entries in it.

Mr. Serjeant Sliee. — ^Yes ; we shall have an opportunity, my Lord, of showing that to
the jury before we have done.

Mr. DANIEL SCULLY BERGEN sworn.— Examined by Mr. Attorney-General,

Are you Inspector of Police? I am Chief Superintendent of the Rural District. —
Did you search the prisoner's house ? Yes. — Did you find that book (handing the second
book to the witness) ? This book was found in the prisoner's house.'— Amongst his other
books? The search commenced on the Sunday, the 16th of December, and continued- on
the 17th.— When did you find that book? Either the 16th or the 17th.— Was it found
amongst his other books ? It was.

Mr. Attorney-General, — This, my Lord, we have shown to be in the prisoner's hand-
writing ; there is a long series of medical memoranda, and then there is an entry on the
subject of strychnia ; it is merely to show that his attention had been called to
strychnia.

Mr. Serjeant Shee, — ^And a vast number of other things.

Mr. Attorney-General. — Yes, this among others : " Nux vomica seeds of strychnus like
an orange." Some of it I do not quite understand : a certain quantity of seed " con-
tains 34 grains of strychnia ; one grain will give a bitter taste to 80 pounds of water."
There are some medical hieroglyphics which I do not understand. " It reddens bruchsia."
Then there is this : " One grain of strychnia is equal to six grains of bmchsia :" then there
is the same note as is found in the frontispiece of the other book, " It kills by causing tetanie
contraction of the respiratory muscles."

Lord Campbell.— He might have copied some article in the EncyclopsDdia upon
strychnia.

Mr. Attomey^General. — Very likely.

Mr. Serjeant Shee. — Your Lordship will see that it is upon this page, and there are a
great many other pages of continuous writing: I understand my learned friend does not
mean to suggest

Mr. Attorney-General, — I do not at all suggest that it was put there for a particular
purpose, but merely that as part of his medical knowledge he was acquainted with the
properties of strychnia and the mode in which it operated upon the human frame.

Mrs. JULIETTE ELIZABETH HAWKES sworn.— Examined by Mr. ffuddleston.
Do you keep a boarding-house at 7 Beaufort Buildings, Strand, London ? Yes.— Do

THIRD DAY, Mat 16, 1856. 101

you know Palmer, the prisoner ? Yes.— Was he at your house on the Ist of December
last? He was. —Did he ask you to buy anything for him ? He asked my porter.— Did
you hear him ask the porter? No, I did not.~Had you any conversation with Palmer
yourself? I had. — ^What took place ? Not on that day. — On any day ? Yes.

Lord Campbell.— When ? On the 19th of November.

Mr, JIuddleston^—Did you purchase any game, or fish, or turkey ? I did.— When was

not. — ^Had you no conversation with Mr. Palmer about it ? Not on that day. — On any

day had you any conversation with Mr. Palmer about the things which you put in the
hamper ? No.— ^Not at any time ? No. — How came you to buy those things ? By order.
— ^By order from whom? From Mr. Palmer to our porter.— Did you hear Mr. Palmer
^peak to the porter ? I did not — What is the name of the porter? Frederick Slack —
Where is he ? At my house. — Is he at your house now ? Yes. — You say you packed
these things up in a hamper : just say yes or no, did you send them anywhere ? Yes. —
Did you direct them ? I directed them. — ^Who gave you the direction ? The porter. —
What did you do with the hamper after you had directed it ? The porter took it to the
station.

JLoBD Campbell.— You desired the porter to take it to the station? *I desired the
porter to take it to the station.

c. Mr. Serjeant Shee, — You did not take it to the station?

Mr. Huddleston.^YovL gave it to the porter? 'I gave it to the porter.— Who paid you
for those things? I have not been paid. — ^At that time was Palmer staying at your
house ? He came up that day.

I>ord Campbell. — ^Which day ? The 1st of December,

Mr. Bvddleston, — ^Did you tell Mr. Palmer what you had done with the hamper? I
did not see him. — You have not seen him ? No, not since. — ^What was the direction'
which you wrote on the hamper ? Mr. Ward : " W. W. Ward, Esq."— Where ? Staf-
fordshire ; I think it was Bnrton-upon-Trent, or Stoke*upon-Trent ; Stoke-upon-Trent,
I think.

Xx>rd Campbell.— Then this as it stands does not at all affect the business ?
Mr. Attorney-General. — ^No, my Lord ; we will send for the porter.

Mr. GQOBGE HEBRING s^om.— -Examined by Mr. Wei^y.

Where do you live ? 3, Albert Terrace, New Cross. — ^What are you ? I am inde-

S indent. — ^Did you know the deceased Cook ? Yes. — How long ? About two years.—
id you meet him at die Shrewsbury races last November ? 1 did.— Did you se^ him
there on every day of the races. I did. — I believe you put up at the Raven ? I did. —
Did he appear to be in his usual health ? I should think so. — ^What was the latest time
on the Weidnesllay at which you saw him ? about 7 o'clock was it not ? Between ^ and
7.*— Had yon a private room along with Fisher and others ? I had.

Lord Campbell. — ^You and Mr. Fisher, and who el^? Mr. Read and Mr. Jones.

Mr. Welsby. — Mr. Thomas Jones ? Mr. Thomas Jones. — ^Was it next to the private
room occtipied by Cook and Palmer? Yes, divided by a partition. — Did you see Cook
on the Thursday morning ? Yes. — Had he any money then in his possession ? Not
that I know of at that time. — ^Did you on that day see him with money ? No.-r-Did you
at any time at Shrewsbury see him with money ? Yes. — When, on which day ? On the
Wednesday. — What kind of money ? Bank of England notes, and other notes, country
notes ; he was counting them up, he was spreading them on the tablei^^Were you able
to ascertain at all the amount? No. — ^Not at all? Not at,all.*-^Were th^re a con-
siderable number of notes ? There were a coosiderable namber.-*-Did he show you at
Shrewsbury his betting-book? Yes. — ^Did it contain entries of bets made upon the
Shrewsbury races. Yes. — ^Did you cast up ?

Mr. Serjeant Shee. —I do not think we can have the contents.

Lord Campbell. — The last account we have of it is that it was in Mr. . Palmers
possession.

Mr, Serjeant Shee, — I da not think there is any proof of its ever having been in Mr.
Palmer's possession.

Mr. Aitorney^Generalj^We show that it was in the dead man's room on the Tuesday
night before his death, and Mr. Palmer is afterwards seen Ipokiipg aboiit ; :we have no
one else, my Lord, that we can resort to. .

102 TIOAL OF WILIlAir TALltfiB.

' JLord Cavfbezi*— I do not think ii^e «an receive this-e'^fdeiiea.

Mr. Att&mSff'GwtercU.—VeTy veil, my Lord.

Mr. Welsby, — Did you on Monday the Idth of November receive a letter from
Mr. Palmer? I did.— Ebive yon that letter here? Yes. — (^Tke witness jprodticed the
tame,)

Mr. 'Straight— ^rh\S'H a letter marked "T." It is a letter, my Lord, signed " WHliaai
Palmer," dated "November 16th, 1855." There is no address :—" Dear Sir,— I shall
ftel -nrach obliged tf you will give me a call at 7, Beaufort Buildings, Strand, to-morrow
(Monday), about half-past 2, and I am, dear Sir,' yours tmly, William Palmer."^

'Mr. l^/s&^.— *In consequence of that, did you on the following day go to that place
according to the appointment ? 1 received it on the Monday, and I called there on that
day. — Did YOU find Palmer there? I did. — I believe be asked you to have some brandy-
and^ water? He asked me what I would take. — Did you take some brandy-aad-water 2
No.

Lord Cj^fVELLr-^AX what time of the day did yon go? At half-past two ezflctly.-—
He asked you what you would take ? Yes.

Mr. Welsby, — ^Whatthen; nrhat did y«a say? I deelined to take any thii^g.*^ What
was said next? 1 then asked him how Mr. Cook was. — What did he say? Hesaid^
'' He is all right."*^nything more? "The physician fgicve him a Aeseof ealoneU'and
advised him not to come out to-day, it being a damp," or ** wet day ;" I 4o not Jcnow
which term he used. — ^What was said next ? " What I want to see you about is settling
his account." — Palmer said that? Palmer said that; it was all one sentence. — tiad he
imything in his hand when h^ said that ? While he was say ins it he was taking out. half
a -sheet of note paper, and he was holding it in his hand wkile he finished the sentence.—^
Go on ? He said, as he held the paper in his hand, ** This is iC 1 rose to take it ; he
said, " You had better take it diywn, this will be-'a eheok.agahist you. — Did he hand you.
a)me paper to take it down upon? .At the same time pointing' 4o seme paper that was
Iriiig upon the table.»-^Did you write vpon that .paper? I did.-~From nis dictation?
From his dietatien.-^Have yea here the paper wfai^ yon so wrote ? I have.— Will yoa
read it ? Shall I^ead^it, my Lord, as: Mr. Palmer dwatad it to me, or as I put itd^^ra
myself ? • »

Lord Gam BBBXX<.-^tAs he dictated it ? He said, '' t'Reoa're of - Ingham 90Ol.,.Barr 300/.,
Green 140/., Morris 2004, Nelson SO/;" .then he .asked me "how much I made Uiat ; I
said, " 1020/. ;" he said, " Pay yourself 6/., and Shelly 30/. ; and if you see Bell, tell him
that Mr. Cook will come iq) orf either Thursday or Friday, and settle with him himself;
how nmoh' does that maike it?" 1 deducted 36/. from 1020/.,.and^said it was 9ft4/.; he
said, " That is what Cook. makes it : if I give you 16/. it will make* 1000/. ;< out of that
pay yourself fbr my bill." I ^sti^ped writing and lo^ced up ; I said, ^' Your bill ! Ot
know no difference between the two bills :" he sai4, "^ Pay Padwiok 350/.^ ai^ Pratt i6Q^
makmglOOO/." ' ^

Mr. Wflsby, — Is'tliat aH tiiat is written upon the paper ? There we two^addressea en
it: he wrote Padwick's «addres6, *' H.'Padwick, Esq., 2, Hill Stoeet, Berkeley ^uare;'*
the other was A^. Pratt^s, **'5, New Streeft, May Fair;" that I /wrote myself. — At his
dictation ? Yes ; it was where I was to send the money to, as I said I. did not know^eir
addres^s. — Did 'he say anything further to you as to how or when you were to send to
Pratt and Padwick ? He then said, " You had better write out a cheque for Pratt and
fbr Padwick ; fill up a cheque for Padwick and Pratt, and.send them at once : I told hiia
that I had only one blank cheque in my pocketbook : he said, " You can easily fill it ii|^
on half a sheet of pi^r," or " on a piece of paper."

Mr, BABON/Au»BB80K.-^It'ill up what ? A blank eh^ue.**-rAaQther cheque ? These
were two;.one^r Pratt and one for Padwick: I had only one biaak cheque: J re&used
to- do so,.as.I h^ not received (the. mouAy.

Mr. Wels&j^^What did heisay than'? He said it would be aU right, as Ock^ would
not deceive him. — What more did he say about the payment to Pratt and'Padwidc? -He
wished me particularly to pay Mr. Pratt the 450A : his words* as neatly as J reinelilber
them» were, ** You must pay Pratt the 450/,, as it is for a bill," or'** joint bill of sale on the
mare :" I do not recollect which he said, whether a bill or a joint bill. — What more jdid
he say; anything as to going to Pratt and Padwick? . He told me that he was ^wng
round to see both Mr. Pratt aind Mr. Padwick, aiid would tell fhem that I would send it
on. — Did he tiiien inquire into the account l^tween you and him ? Previous to men-
ttdning that, Iremariced lhftt,'tfhe woMd tell me ihfeir addresses,*! would call after teavuiK
Tattersifll's, and leave the amount of money with -fliem: he saSd, " You 'hjid bettfersertS
them a cheque. — Did he inquire into the state of your accotiAt'? 'Y'cs.*— What about it?

THIRD IDLiT, 3IAT 16, 1856. lOS

He asked me what there yna betsreen us ; lienlid, ** What is^ere between us ? " I said,

** 4iW. ;" ke aud, " You owed me 40/. on, the LiYerpool nuaeting ;" I said, << I will Mttle

that with Mr. Sargent f I was to settle it with Mr. Sarge«t» I thinkJ said; Idoiodt

know which.— Go on ? He said, " But you have not settled it jet, as, I hftve dotteithaiC

with him."— What did you say to that ? He went on, " Thevefore, if I give yo« 5/.,vthat

will be iight."— What did he do ? At the same time he. took out of his pocket a 50/, note.

— ^A Bank of England note ? A Bank of England note. — You were not able to^ve him

change, I believe ? He required then 29/. out of .the 50/. note, and I w$is not able.tOrgi'vi^

him change. — What did he do then ? He told me that if t would give him a cheque, it

would be the same thing.— "What did you give liim ? I gave : him a cheque for 20^, and

xune sovereigns. — I believe you put that 60/., note wUh other notes of the same amount

which you had in yoar posseasum? I believe I had two oiiher 60/. cotes. — You do m^t

know the aqmber or data ? I do not — ^When y«a were going a«tay,'diii he: say >ftnythiDg

more about the cheques to Pratt and Padwick ? Not that I ean ireBMnber at present.-**

About sending the ch<|iue8 immediately .? He pressed me to send them immediately ; he

said that ifl sent them immediately, it would be. before the closing of the Bank, or before

Bank time ; he made some remark of that kind. — Did he say anything to you about

soiding word to Cook in'the <50untry as to whit you had done with reference to the

aettlement of the aecoant ? He said, ** When you have -settled this account, write down

word to either me or Cook. — Was that the first instruction which he gave you in' that

lespect to send tcrhim or Cook P 'The Ant iustvaotion,. and I'was then >goiag o«t .df ^the

roam. — ^DldW say no mere than that aboat sending down ? "I.tm^fudd lomid voA said,' " I

ihall certunly wnte toMr. Cook."-^What made you s^y .that ? Beeavoe If iboqght J was

settling Mr. Cook's account. — Did you say that in) Answer toAjnythiiig/thatBahBaer.flaidrSi

In answer to his having s^ted, "Write down word to either me orCook."— 4Hadyou

ever settled an account for Cook before? There was more conven^ation, passed.-^ Wh^t

more ? He said, " It does not much matter which ;" and I said, ^^ If .1 jLu&ess Mr. Cook>

'Palmer, Rugeley, Stafford,* it will be correct, will it not?" He «aid, "Yes."~After

leaving that place (Beaufort Buildings), did you go toTattersall's ? t-did* — What m^ney^

did you receive tiiere on Cook's account ? I received all, except 1 10/. of Mr. Morris,, who

paid me only 90/. instead 6f 200/.-^Did you send ftom Tattersall^s a chefjue for 450/. to.

Pratt ? I did.^Did you post a letter to Cook from Tattersall's ?— I did.

Liord Campbell. — Addressed to him? Addressed as I have mentioned.-^To Cobk?

Mr. Welsby, — On* the next Tuesday, the 20th, did you receiver telegraphic message?
I did.

Lord Campbell. — ^That is the next day?

Mr. Wehhy, — Yes, my Lord. {To the voitness) Have you got that here? I have not,
— -What has become of it, do you know ? I gave -it to Captaia Ifettoh- on the 'corooer^s
inquest at Rugeley.

Mr. Welsby. — Captain sHattoa states that \ he handed it to 4he coroner, my Lord,
and that he has not got it back. ( To the toitness) In consequence of receiving that mes-
sage, did you write agam by "post to Cook that^ay ? Yes. — Didyou address that letter
as before? I did; I believe, thftt letter was not posted till the Wednesday.— ^Have 'you
cntte hiXk of exeliasige'? '^I have.---«Three ? Yes.— hDo yon know Palmer's handwiititig ?
I do. — Jtist 16oki«nd'telI ipe whether ^the'sigBatasei to that QBe,«and'tlkd.aae8ptaBoe.to thef
other two, are in Palmer's writing ?

Xiord CAMPBXLL.'-^Youitnesn that he'dretf'One.

Mr. Wir/^Jt/.-^He drew one, my Lord, and a«cepted'tiie two others.

When I say I know Mr. 'Palmer's handwriting, I have never seen him write faifnself.
— ^Have you corresponded with him ? The only letter I ever received is the one handed'
in at tixe present time^-^Do youknow Cook's Inndwndng^? I do.

Lord Cabtpbell.— Do you prove* the handwriting df Palmer ?

Mr. Welsby. — No, my Lord, not of Palmer, but of Cook.

'Lord Campbell. — Then I must strike that out.

Mr. Welsby. — Are the signature to two of the bills, and the acceptance of the third, in
Cool^'s handwriting ? I believe so; but I am no judge of handwriting.

Lord Cam tBELL.^— Have you seen Cook write ? Yes.-^Do you believe that to be his
luuld w'riting ? I do. » . • •

liim

Mr. Welsby. — From whpm did you g^t those bills ? Prom Mr. 'Pifli«.— Did • you grre'
m cash fbrthea? 'raid. - ' '*

104 TBUL OP WILLIAM PALMER.

Mr. JOHN BOYCOTT caUed again.
Mr. Wekby. — Look at those bills, and tell me -whether the signature ** William
Palmer" to one of them, and the acceptance to the other two, are in Palmer's hand-
writing, the prisoner's ? Yes.

Mr. Wehby. — That which Cook accepts is drawn by Palmer, and those Vhich are
drawn by Cook are accepted by Palmer. My Lord, they are all dated Taesday the Iftth
of September, 1855 ; each of them is for 200/. ; one at a month's date, and the other two
at 2 mouths' ; each of them payable to the order of the drawer.

Mr. GEORGE HERRING called again.

Mr. Wehhy, — ^When the one month bill became due, which would be on the 18th of
October, did Cook pay you any money in part discharge of it ? He did witl^n a week.
— ^How much ? 100/. — ^Did he afterwards at Shrewsbury -pay you the rest of that 200/. ?
He paid me the remaining 100/.

Mr. Attomey-Qmeral, — On which bill was that ? On the first bill.

Mr. Welshy.—ThsX is the one drawn by Palmer and accepted by Cook.

Lord Campbsix. — On which day at Shrewsbury ? I cannot tell. — Can you tell
the day of the month? It was either on the Wednesaay evening or the Thursday
morning.

Mr. Attomey-Generah — ^At the Shrewsbury races ? At the Shrewsbury races.

Mr. Welsbyi — Is either of the other two bills the 200/. which Palmer mentiotied that
you were to pay out of the 1020/. ? I suppose so. — Did you deduct that amount oat of
the money wnich you received ? I did.

Lord Campbell.— The 400/. ? The 200/.— There were two bills ? There were three
ibr 200/, originally. — Cook paid you one, and then there were two of 200/. each remain-
ing ? Mr. Palmer told me to deduct one of the bills for 200/. out of the sum which I
received for Mr. Cook. — I supposed that the other two, each for 200/., Palmer meant to pay
out of the 1000/.? Wo.

Mr. Welshy. — Your Lordship will remember that there was on the paper written by
the witness at Palmer's dictation, ** Pay yourself my bill 200/."

Lord Campbell. — That is only one.

Mr. Wehby. — ^You still hold the other, and claim upon it, I suppose ? No. — ^What
then ? I did not pay Mr. Padwick the 350/. which Palmer told me. — Had you another
bill for 500/. ? Yes.— Have you it here ? Yes.

Lord Campbell. — ^You are now introducing another bill.

Mr. Welshy, — Yes, my Lord, for 500/.

Lord Campbell. — ^Beyond the three ?

Mr. Wekhy, — ^Beyond the three.

{The bUl Wis produced and handed to Lord Campbell.)

Mr. THOMAS SMYRNE STRAWBRIDGE sworn.— Examined by Mr. Wekby. .",
1 What are you ? The Manager of the Bank at Rugeley.

Lord Campbell* — ^This is a bill dated the 5th October, 1855, pttq>ortiiig to be drawn
by William Palmer on Mrs. Sarah Palmer, and endorsed by William Pidmer and J.
Parsons Cook.

Mr. Welsby. — ^Will you look at that bill : do you know the prisoner's handwriting?
Yes. — ^Do you believe that the signature to that bill is the prisoner's handwriting? , I do.

Lord Cabipbsll. — ^Both the drawing and the endorsement? Both the drawing sn^
the endorsement.

Mr. Welsby, — It purports to be accepted by Sarah Palmer, does it not ? It purports to
be accepted by her. — Do you know the handwriting of Sarah Palmer, the prisoner's
mother ? I do. »

Mr. Serjeant Shee, — ^I apprehend, my Lord, that this is not evidence against the
prisoner.

Lord Campbell. — ^Why not ?

Mr. Serjeant Shee, — ^It has nothing to do with the subject of this inquiry, my Lord.

Lord Campbell. — It may have a great deal to do with it : I am most anxious io
exclude everything which has no bearing upon it.

Mr. Serjeant Shee, — I am quite sure that your Lordship is : I do not see what bearing
it has upon this inquiry by whom ** Sarah Palmer" was written upon that bill.

^M

. THIRD DAr, May 16, 1856. 105

Mr. Atiomiy^Generah — It has this most important bearing ; I do not know whether
jour Lordship it ill think it necessary to discuss it.

Lord CAMPBEUu-oWe are all of opinion that it is admissible.

Mr. Welsby.— You sAj you know the handwriting of Mrs. Sarah Palmer, the prisoner's
mother ? I do.— By what means do you know her handwriting ? I have seen her write.
—Had she an account at your bank ? She had.— Have you paid cheques purporting to
be drawn by her ? I have. — ^Do you believe that to be her handwriting ? I should say
certainly not;

Mr. Wc/%.— Your Lordship has taken the particuhurs of the bill, I think: it is for
500/. at three months, dated 5th October, 1865.

Mr. GEORGE HERRING called again.

Mr. Wehby,— Thai bill Is also endorsed by Cook, is it not? Yes.— Is that Cook's
handwriting ? I am sure of it.

Lord Campbixi^— " J. Parsons Cook ;" " Parsons " at full length? Yes.

Mr. Weisby. — In every case of these bills it is ** J. Parsons Cook," my LonL (To ih$
tDftnm) Do you know in what way Cook used to sign his name ? Not for certain. —
From whom did yon get that 600/. bill ? From Mr. Fisher.— Whi^t money did you pay
for it ; and to whom ? I paid 200/. to Mr. Palmer, and 275/. to Mr. Fisher.— The 25/. was
discount, I suppose ? Yes. — It was not paid at maturity, I believe ? ^No. — I believe you
hire taken proceedings against the prisoner upon it ? I have.

Lord Campbell. — ^When ? I cannot say exactly. — Nearly when ? Within the laat

month.

Cross-examined by Mr. Orwe.

Ton nsed an expression that when Palmer said *< Pay yourself the 200/. for my bill,"
yon answered " I know no difference between yours and his '*? "I know no difference."
—"Between yours and his;" that is, "your bill:" did you know that they had had
transactions together as partners ? «

Mr. Att^mey^-GeneraL — Stop ; what particular transaction ?

Mr. Grxwe, — If he does not answer it I cannot go further.

Lord Campbell.— Do you know that, whether they Had had any joint transactions ?
I do not.

Mr. Grove. — Why then did you use that expression, ** I know no di^erence between
yours and his " ? I received the bills all at once, and knew no difference between them.
— Do you mean that both the names were on all the bills ; is that what you mean ? Yes.
— ^You stated that you were with Palmer at Shrewsbury on the Wednesday evenine, I
think it was ; did you know of several people beinff ill the following day ? What day
are yon speaking of? — Were you there on Wednesday ? I was.— On that day did you
know of several people being ill ? Yes. — ^What was the nature of the- attack ? Speaking
of myself it was a kind of diarrhoea. — Vomiting and sickness ? Not myself. — I am not
speaking of yourself, but of others who were ill f Not that I know of.-*-xou were not ill
yourself, I believe ? I was.

Mr. Baron Aldsbson. — He says he had the diarrhoea.

Mr. Grcyce. — ^What was the nature of your attack ? Diarrhoea.^— Where did you put up
at? At the Raven Inn. — ^You took your meals there ? Yes. — Did your companions also
have their meals at the Raven ? Yes. — Were they ill ? No.— Not any of them ? There
"vas no one ill that stopped in the house, but there was one gentleman who came there
and dined with us one day ; he was unwell. — Did you dine every day at the Raven ? how
many days were you there ? I arrived there on the Monday night, and I left on the
Friday morning, I believe, and I dined every day there. — Did you dine there on the
Tuesday ? Yes. — Palmer did not dine with" you that day, I believe ? Nor any other
day. — You saw Cook on the race-course ? I did. — More than once, I believe ? Several
times. — In what state was the ground ? It was very wet and damp. — ^Did you state that
to Cook ; did you remonstrate with him about his standing on the damp ground? Yes»
on the Thursday morning; that was after he had been taken ill on the Wednesday
night. — How late did you see Palmer in London lon the Monday that you have been
speaking of? I arrived there at half-past 2, and I left, as nearly as possible, at a quarter
past 3 J that was the last I ever saw of Mr. Palmer; I was with him three-quarters of an
hour.

Re-examined by Mr. Attomey^Generdl,

Were any of your party at the Raven besides yourself ill ? None of our party.— None
of your party at the Raven were ill that you are aware of; except that you aad diarrhoea

106 THI J£L OP WIIXUII IPALMBR.

Cook had T«autiBg ? .Idumw notidng' abmit' Mr. Oook'S'coslplBtet ; * I* was ill in bed
myself.

Mr. Babon ALDEBsoNt**-4ADd<tiie.g(Bntl«iiiflii'Wlto caiii^to'dhiis-wiliiftliem? '

FREDBlbiCK SLACK «woni.-*Examiiied by 'Mr. ISuddleston.

Are you the porter at Mrs.' Hawkes*s boarding-house in Beaufort Buildings ? I am.—
Do you remember Palmer b^ing there on the 1st of December ? I do. — ^Dkl he give you
any directions ? He did. — ^What did he say to you ? He wished me toget a basket of
game for him ; he gave me the direction to put on it, directed to "Mr. W. Ward, Sioke-
npon-Trent, StafforaAire."— Did he tell yon where to get the game ? Where I pleased.—
Any fish ? A cod-fish. — And what else ? A barrel of oysters, a brace of pheasants, and
one turkey. — Did he say anything about them besides that? He did not wish this gentleman
to know where they came from. — "Where did he give you the direction ? In our coffee-
room. — t)ld you see him writeit? 1 did, — Did you give the message to your mistress^
Mrs. Hawkes? I did. — I believe she got the turkey and* the pheasants, anxl^'the cod-'fish
and the oysters, and packed them in a hamper? No; she got the tuHcey and the
pheasants, and. I got the oysters -and the codt-fish.-- Did she give you a hamper ? I got the
LuDper. — What did -you do with the (hamper ? I put the things idl in.-^fter you had
put them in- what 'did you 'do with it ? I sewdd it 'lip and took it to the railway. •

Mr^ /9^>an^i9Atf&.-^WiU%lr. JastieeOresffwiillbegood enoctghto ^and me tiie green

iKNik?

Mr. Justice Cressweix. — ^Brother Shee, there is Strong internal evidence of this book
being kept by a peraon who was then 'a student {han^Ung the -^Bcaneto the learned
Serjeant),

Adfoumedto to-^wrew df 10 o'clock.

FOXJETH DAY'S TEIAli.

Mat 17, 1866.

GEDRGfE BATE sworn.— ^Examined by Mr. James,

What Are you ?. I was ^brou^t up. a fanner. — ^What are you.now ? J am. not in
business at all.— Do you know the prisoner William Palmer ? Ido. — How long have
you known him ? Eight or nine years past. — Now in S^ptemliet) October, and November
of last vear,^duiiDg those three monthis were you in any employment of his? I used to
see his lads Aid their dut^ in feeding his stock of horses. — .You used to look after his
stock? Yes, that they wece attooded to.

T#erd- Cabowke^j — Yourusedf toisee that the boys who had .tho ease of his houses did
their duty?. Yes.

)l^.Vi(m^^*^^Had'y«u^miy pay for that? No stated«alary ; I used to receive hmoi^
occasionally.^- About what per week do you suppose you had'? I really cannot say'4
some weeks I used to receive two 'sovereigns, -and some one. — Wh)we were you living ?
In Biupeley. — Whatiiouse did you live in ? I lodged in !^geley. — What might you have
paid S)T your lodging per week ? Six shillings and s^j^pence per week. — Are you a
majTided^man ? No.-^I)id you know John Parsons Cook, the deceased. ? Yes. — ^Do you
remember about September seeing him at the prisoner's 'house ? Yes, I have no doubt
I did see him in September last.-^ Somewhere about the 8th of- September. I could not
fix the date ; but I have certainly seen him there in September .'r-Did you see liim at
dinner at the prisoner's ? I dined with him I believe in the month of "September at. Me.
Palmer's; I have occasionally gone to dine with Mr. Palmer.

Xetrd Camsbelx.— %Then you sat at table w ith 4iam ? Of oourse.

* Mr. Jlam^.-*«Do you tvemettibep eitherdminc dinner or aftor-dinaer aaything being
said about ttninsvancettot-beproposed'on your li#e ?. After dianerId».^-^In'Mr.%&lHier
and.Mr^ Cookts pvesenoe? Yes.'^Whkt was said about it, sndwho began the conver-
sation? leafinot say ; ituras either Mr. Cook br Mr. Palmer, butiwhidi I ouinotsay.—
Tell us, to the^best ofyiourifeeeolleetloh; what was' said ftbout it ?

Mr. Serjeant' Shee,'-^6e8 yOur Lordship think this matter is Televant to the • inquiry,
this being two months before the alleged pffence, and being a totally difierent trans-
action.

Lord OioiFKBLau-^Wb caaiioti«t 'present <68ry»theqttc»t]eiift 'are not rdetmnt. What
do youpropdse'to pvoKreqbyj^ig^eiideiiee, Mt, Jaaaes ? «

•FOtTRTH DAY, May 17, 19Se. lOt

Mr. James.— ^^at a proposal iras made ; that it -vras pnt before the witness to sign ;
that it was attested by Mr, John Parsons Cook ; and then we go on to show what was
done with this insarance : it was not taken, and we carry it down to November.

The Attomey-Oeneral, — I stated it as &0brding one amongst oilier motives for that
which is charged to the prisoner, and also as showing the- position in which he was placed
at that time peconiarily. .It is an insurance fraudulently enected for the purpose of raising
money iq)on it.

Mr, Serjeant Shee, — ^Insarances are not effected without* paying heavy premiums.

The AUsme^^Gemeral.-^Thai is one of the circBmgtaiieet, it ahows it wss a fraad.

Mr. Baron Ai«inaisoN. — ^Do you thow that the insuraaee was for Palmer's benefit ot
byPahaer?

The Attorney-General, — ^We are going to show the wliole of tiiis was drawn up in
Palmer's writing ; the object being, as appears from the correspondenoe with Mr. Pratt,
to get an insurance for Palmer's benefit.

I/)Td GAMMnBLL. — You are going- to show it was a Ihiud.

The i*#or«tfy-(?CTi<?ra?.— Certainly, my Lord, and Mt. Cook knew it^ for he signed the
paper.

I^d Campbell, — On the Attorney-General's opening 1 douUed whether this would
he relevant and proper evidence to be received on this trial ; and, .upon consideratioi;^,
Biy brothers aigree with me it is too remote to be admissible.

Mr. James.— Do you remember the death of Mr. Cook at the Talbot Anns ? Yes.^-
l^yoa remember the inquest being held? Tes.~:Now, do you know William Webb
Ward, the Coroner ? Yes. — Did you see the prisouer on. the evening of the 8th of D&-
eember while die xn/quest was being held ? Yes. — Just look at this letter ; this is the
letter to the Coroner which was read yesterday (a letter was handed to the untnesi) ; it ifi
introductory to another matter ; did Palmer, the prisoner, ^ve you a letter ? I believe
he did ; he gave me a letter. — Look at that carefully ; is that the letter ? Yes it is. —
What did he tell you to do with it ? To go to Stafford and. give it to Mr. Ward.

I^rd Campbell. — ^About what time of the da}^ was that? Between 9 and 10 in the

QonuDg.

Mr. James, — ^At the time he gave you that letter to take to Mr. Ward the Corcmer^
^d he. give yon ^ letter directed to a man of the name of Frant^, a dealer in game?
Yes.-ols he a dealer in game in Stafford ? Yes. — ^When the prisoner gave you that letter
to Frantz, did. he tell ^you what you were to do with any ^me or any orders you were
to give ? He told me there would be a package of game -, I was to direct it to Mr. Ward
i&a send it to him.— You mean a package of game from Fcfmta? Yes. — Did he ss(y

aoythiiig to you about if anything was said about it? Nothing more than that

I should hawe the game i^om Frantz and I was to send it to Mr. Ward. — ^Did you
get a basket of game from Frantz ? Yes. — Upon the. order that the prisoner had gives
yoQ ? Yes. — ^What did you do with it ? I directed it to Mr. Ward, and seut it to hinu
r^ere was it directed to? " Webb Ward, Esq., Coroaer, Staffofd."— Did you direct
It yourself, or did Frantz the game-seller direct it ? I will not take my oath whether i^
▼as not " Ward, Solicitor, Stafford."-— Now did you direct it yourself? I directed it
^m what Palmer told me ; that I should have some game, and that it was to be sent to
J^-—After .you had directed this game to Mr. Ward the Coroner, where did you
deliver that to him? I gave a man threepence to take it.— Did you afterwards go
to the Dolphin Inn, at Stafford ? Yes. — Did you deliver the letter you had in your
pocket to Mr. Ward himself? Yes, I believe I did.— Where did you find him?. At the
bolplnn.

Lord Caupbell.— The Dolplun in Stafford? Yes.

Mr. /ame«^~^Yoa found him at the DoljpMn ? Yes.^-Where was he sitting at the
j^lphin ? In ihe<sKdLiiig*«oom. — ^Where diu you deliver the note to him ? I told him
^ wanted, to- speak to him, and he followed me out into the yard or passage, «nd I gave it
to hiia tfa«re.--Why did yoaoall him out ? Were there «ny other people there in. the
^oa where he was? YeL-^Why did you call him out then to give him the letter in
"^passage?

'^f' Berf«aint'8hee,^l do not know we can h«,xre:tht8: had yon anr directions ftwn
«« prisoner. as to how you' were to driver the letter toihim P No, dewMedly not.

Lord Campbell.— In the smoking^^room there were other persons ; you took' him into
«« yard and delivered the letter ? Yes.

. ^r. ;/cim^5.— iDid you see flie prisoner again when yt)u went back' to Rugeley that
^flt? '^es.— Did you tell him what you had done ? Yes.— 'Wlwt did you tell hiln't

iO^ TBUL OF WILLIAM PALHJBR.

I told him I delivered the letters I took to Stafford that dar, and that i sent die game.—
Now do you remember Thursday the 10th of December ? I do. — On that day were you
seut for to the prisoner's house ? Yes. — ^About what time ? It .was early in the morning.
— About what hour? I think it was about 12 o'clock, about mid-day. — Did you go to
his house ? Yes. — ^Where did you find him t In bed. — ^What did he say to you ? He
wanted me to go to Stafford. — ^Tell me, as near as you can, the words that he used; what
did he say ? He wanted me to go to Stafford ** to take Webb Ward a letter," and to
** take care no one saw me give it. — ^What else did he say to you ? I was to " take care
no one saw me give it him." — ^Now did he say anything to you about getting any money?
On the Saturday he had; I went to a man who took him some money in Stam>rd« — ^But
4>n this occasion did he say anything about getting some money from a person of the
name of Thirlby, or Ben? Yes, before I set out that day. — What did he say to you?
*' Gro to Ben and tell him he wanted the 5/. note."

Lord Campbell. — ^Who wanted it? Palmer. — He said, ''Go to Ben and tell him I
want the 5/. note " ? Yes.

Mr. James. — Who is Ben ? I took it to be Mr. Thirlby, his a«sistatit — ^Benjamin Thirlby?
Yes. — Just go on : ''tell him I want the 5/. note " ? " That I have no small change ;" and
I believe then he asked me to look in a drawer in the dressing-glass that stood on the
table, and he said, " Tell me the amount of the bill, George ;" f looked in, and there was
a 50/. Bank of England bill.— What did you do with it? 1 left it there.— Was this before
he gave you the letter to take to Mr. Ward ? Yes. — Now, having found that note there
and left it there, did you go down stairs ? I went to Thirlby's house. — ^For the 52. ? I
went to Thirlby for the 5/. — ^Did you get the note from Thirlby ? I got a 52. note on a local
bank whrch, I believe, was Bridgenorth. — What did you do with it ? I took it to Mr.
Palmer's.-^When you took that note back to him did he then ^ve y^ the letter which
you were to take to Mr. Webb the Coroner ? I went down stairs. — When you went down
stairs what was Palmer doin^? He was sitting in the room. — Where were the writing
things ? On the bottom of his bed.

Lord Camfbeix. — ^Where was he ? He was still sitting up in bed.
"*: Mr. James. — How long did you remain down stairs ; about how long? About half an
hour.' — Where did you remain ? In the yard or the kitchen. — ^Wheu you went up agun
what happened? Palmer asked me what was the amount of the bill which was in the
drairer; I just looked at the drawer, and there was the same bill which I believe I left
there ; then he gave me the letter to go to Stafford.^^A letter sealed or wafered ? I cocdd
not swear which.-*-Where did you deliver that letter ? Between the railway station and
an inn called the Grand Junction.-^ Was that where yon fi>and Mr. Ward ? I observed
him go through the room in the station and gave it to him on the fl8gs.-—When you gave
the letter to Mr. Ward what did he do with it ? I believe he crompled it in his hand and
put it- in his pocket. — ^Did he read it in your presence ? No. — He did not open it? Not
in my presenee.— Did yon tell Mr. Ward from whom you had bronght it ? I btHeve I
did. — ^Did you go back to Rngeley after having done this ? Yes. — Did yon see the pn«
aoner again that evening ? Yes. — ^What did you tell him after you went baek ? . I told
him I had given Mr. Ward the letter. — Did he make any remark to you? No, I
think not.

- Cross-examined by Mr. Serjeant SHee,

You can tell me, I dare say, what was the establishment of horses belonging to Mr.
Palmer at Rugeley ; how msany mares with foal had he, to begin with? I think there
were four brood-mares, and four yearlings, and a three-year-old there. — Can you give me
any notion of their value ? I do not pretend to tell the value of the stock my6elf.--4>o you
know one of them sold for 800 guineas ? I have heard so. — ^\y ere 'any of them in toal
shortly before, or at the beginning of the month of November ? I cannot fiay whether
they were or were not ; I should suppose there were some in foal.— «The staHes were at
the back of his house^ were they not ? Tl^y were some short distanee from his house. —
At the back of it ? Deeidedly. — ^And the paddock at the back of the stables : is limt to ?
The stables were at the paddock. — What quantity of ground had he there ? 1 8houl4 tibink
%\ or 22 acres. — Were these paddocks fenced in, or -were they open to other fielda^ and, if
fenced,: how? The fences were live, growing faawthom.-^Do you rememben^ shortly
before the month of November or in the early part of November, a mare called the Dvefaess
of^Kent slipiking her fbal ? I resnembtr the Duehessof Kent being there; we sap^osed Bhe
had slipped heri.foal,'bat we never could find it.— ^Waa-there.a mare called GM4-£nder'8
Dam ? Yes.r-Had she slipped her. foal ? Not that I am aware of.r-Had. any complaint
been made about dogs going about the paddock ? I think I once said .to Harry» " The
turf seems a good deal ^ut. up. here; how is it ? "—Who is Harry ? The groom.— rWhat
did you see on the turf that induced you to. make that observation? I saw it cat up.

FOURTH DAY, Mat 17, 1856. IrtJ

▼hich I supposed to be with hones' feet, which they coaW TK>t cut up without they galloped.
—Did you attribute that to aoy thing ? I attributed it to the mares galloping about. — Had
you any reason to think they had been run by dogs ? I nev«r saw any dogs run them. —
Did Harry keep a gun there ? I have seen a gun there. — Did he keep a gun which belonged
to his master for any purpose ? I have seen a gun at the paddock. — Did it belong to hid
master ? I cannot say .---Did you ever see it used ? No. — ^Was it in a condition to be used :
dean ? I never had it in my hands to examine it ; I saw it in the place where the com was
kept— What is Harry's surname ? Cockyue. — ^Do you know Inspector Field by sight ?
Xo ; I saw a person who came to me, who they told me was Inspector Field after he went
away.— When did that person come ? I cannot take upon myself to say ; it was the latter
find of September or the beginning of October, or may be November. — Ho came to you,
and told you be was Inspector Field ? He did not. — A person came to you ; did that
person see Palmer? I cannot tell. — Did you see that person whom you say you saw first
in September ? I will not say whether it was September, October, or November. — Was
he a stranger in Rugeley ? To me he was.— Do you know where he put up ? I did not
know he put up at all. — Did you see him more than once at Rugeley ? No, I did not. —
Do I nnderstaud you, you did not know Field at all ? I do not know Field. — Do you
remember, when you went down stairs about this 5/. note, was there a sheriff's officer of
the name of Gillard in the house ? I saw Gillard in the yard. — Is he a sheriffs officer ?
I believe he is. — Did he see Palmer that day ? I cannot say.

Re-examined by the Attomey-GeneraL
Yon saw Gilktrd on the day you took the letter to Mr. Ward? Yes. — ^You say
Jon saw the turf on some occasions cut up from horses having been running about
there; when was that? I should say it must have been shortly after hay-harvest. —
^as it as late as the month of November ? I should think it was the latter end of
September myself; but I could not say to a month which way it was. — ^Do you re-
member the time of Mr. Cook's death ? Yes.~^How long was it before that as far ais
you can say? I really cannot charge my mind.

Mr. THOMAS BLIZZARD CURLING sworn.— Examined by the Attomey-GeneraL

You are a Fellow of the College of Surgeons? Yes. — I believe you are surgeon to
fhe London Hospital ? I am. — Have you turned your attention particularly to the sub-
ject of tetanus ? I have. — You have, I believe, published a work on that subject? Yes,
I have. — We have been told in the course of this inquiry, and I will ask you whether
that is correct, that tetanus signifies spasmodic affection of the voluntary muscles of the
^y? Yes. — How many soi'ts of tet-anus are there, distinguishing one from the other?
Of the true disease, two only ;. idiopathic and ti^omatic-r-There are other sorts of tetanus
^ides those two? There are other diseases in which we see tetanic affection; we
shonld not term them tetanus. — What is idiopathic tetanus, one of the two sorts you
^sve mentioned? It is a primary disease ; it is tetanus originating, as it. were, as apri-.
^'^^ disease, without any wound. — 'Apparently self-generating ?

I^rd Campbell. — Tromatic is from a wound ? Precisely so.

The Attometj'General. — From what causes, as far as you are aware, does idiopathic
tetanus arise ? From exposure to damp and cold ; from the irritation of worms m the
alimentary canal. — Is it a frequent disease in this country ? No ; a very rare one. —
Where it does arise, does it usually end fatally? No.— -In what proportion are the
cases which end fatally to the general number of cases which ^rise ? I am not able
to answer that question, for I have never seen a case of idiopathic tetanus. — How long have
you been surgeon to the London Hospital ? 22 years. — In all that time you have never
seen a case of idiopathic tetanus? No. — Cases of tromatic tetanus are more frequent?
Much more frequent. — How many of them have you seen ; I do not ask you the pre-
cise number, but, as near as you can tell, what is the average of those cases coming to
^e Hospital, or within your experience ? I speak quite within compass when I say I
"ave seen 50 cases; I believe 100 would be nearer the mark. — Will you tell us how the
symptoms of tromatic tetanus first manifest themselves, and then go on to describe how
the disease goes on? The disease first manifests itself by a stiffness about the jaws
and the back of the neck ; rigidity of the muscles of the abdomen usually sets in ; a
]!^?Si^g pain at thepitof th^ stomach is almost a constant attendant of spasm of the
diaphragm, and in many cases- the muscles of the bdck are sensibly affected; then the
spasms, though continuous, ftre liable to aggravation in paroxysms ; as the disease goe^
?D» these paroxysms become more ft>eqtt«nt and more severe : when they occur, the body
}& drawn backwards ; in some instances, = though less frequ^Eitly, it is bent forwards; then,
f^ an acute case, a difficulty in swallowing is a very common thing; a difficulty in breath-
ing also daring the paroxysm, a choking sensation ; the disease may end, supposing it

110 TBIAL OF WILUAM PALMKB.

be fatal, iu two w»j6 : tbe padent may die aomcwiiat suddenly of 8iiffMatioB» owing
to clofture of the qpfiung of the wiiidpipe ; or the patient oaay be worn oat b^ tbe servere
and paiofol spasadSy and the muscles may relax and the patient gradually sink and die. —
Tromatic tetanus is, I believe/ generally &taL? Yes. — ^You have mentioned varioos
symptoms, the lookLng of the jaw; is that an invariable ^mptom in tetanus from
wounds ? Almost constant ; I mentioned^ I think, the stiffiiess of jaw.

Lord CAHF]iBLL.-!^Then lock-jaw is a common symptom of tromatic tetanus. Tea.

The Attorney-General. — Is that the invariable symptom ? Almost constant : I may
gay constant, in a greater or less degree; it is not always strongly mailed, but gezKrally
90.^— At what peric4 of the disease does that show itself? It is an early symptom; I
have omitted another i^rmptom which is important : a peooliar expresnon of the coun-
tenance, very clnraoteristie of the disease. — ^In what part of the comitenanoe does that
principally show itself? Grenerally throughoot ; I can describe it.

Lord Campbell. — ^Is this peculiar to tromatic or idiopathic tetanus? I believe not;
xny observations are taken from tromatic cases.

The Attorney-General, — ^It shows itself through the countenance : what is the appear*
ance ; can you describe it ? There is a contracted condition of the eyelids, a raising of
the angles of the mouth, a contraction of the brow. — ^You have spoken of the body and
of the head, but you have said nothing as to the extremities : in tromatic tetanus are the
arms, legs, hands, and feet affected or not? The lower extremities are sometimes alfected,
and sometimes, but somewhat rarely, the upper : the muscles affected are chiefly those
of the trunk. — When the muscles of the extremities are affected, at what period of the
disease does that generallv occur? It varies; sometimes when the wound is in the
lower extremities the mnscles of the extremities may be affected by that. — ^Bat suppose
you have a wound on either the arm or the legs, at what period of the disease are they
affected ? Generally at an advanced period. — ^You have paid particular attention to the
subject of tromatic tetanua; did you ever know or read of tromatic tetanus being pro*
duced from sore throat ? No. — Did you even know of its being- prodoeed from ehaacce ?
Never.

Lord Campbell. — I do not know that particular species of thing can be insisted' on.

The Attorney 'General, — ^They have cross-examined upon that, my Lord, and we have
received regular and formal notice that that is the case to be set up.
Lord Campbell.— Then proceed in your own course.

The Attorney-General, — We have received fair notice that that is> the case to be set up.
Mr. Serjeant Shee* — ^I am not aware of it.

The Attamey^General, — ^We have received from Mr. Smith a regular notice, directed
to the Solicitor of the Treasury, stating that that is to be set up.

Mr. Serjeant Shee. — My learned friend has not received any notice from us that we
attribute this to a wound.

The Attorney-General. — ^But it is attributed to a chancre and syphilitic sore throat;
I must anticipate the case to be set up.

Lord Campbell. — ^You are quite right ; go on.

The Attorney 'General, — In your opinion would anjr sj^philitic sore, supposing it existed,
lead to tetanus ? I know of no instance ; I think it is a very unlikely case. — ^There is
another important point connected with the disease, which I wish to ask you about : how
long, .ordinarily speaking, does a case of tromatic tetanus, which ends fatally, take before
that point is reached ; before death ensues ? It varies very much, from twen^-four hours
to three or four davs, or longer. — What is the shortest period which ever came to your
knowledge in which the disease ran its course aud ended fatally ? Eight or ten hours ;
the real time could not be ascertained. — If I understand you, the disease when once com-
menced is contiuuous ? Yes. — Did you ever know or hear of a case in which a man
would be attacked one day, and then have twenty-four hours' entire respite and be attacked
again the next ? Never.— As far as your experience goes is it your opinion such a thing
could be? No, I should think it was not tetanus.

Mr. Baron Alderson, — Not tromatic tetanus ?

The Aktomey'Genetal. — ^No, . my Lord. Idiopathic has not come under your notice.
You beard the account given by Mr. Jones, the surgeon, of the< death of the deceased nan
Cook? Yes. — ^Were the symptoms there consistent with, any- form of tromatic tetanus
which has ever come under your knowledge or observation? Now — What distingiMahed
them from the cases o£ tromatic tetanus which you have described? There was ^e
sudden onset of the fatal symptoms ; in all cases that have fallen under my notice the
disease has been preceded by tne xmlder symptoma of tetanus. — ^Gradually pro^preasing to

FQUBTH DAY, May 17,. 1860. tH

tfadr complete deTelopnwnt aad completion and death? Yei.-»-Did yoa hsar ako the
description which- wm given by the woman Mills o£ yrhut he weot tluroagh on the
Monday night? Yes. — In. yoor jodgmcnt were those symptoma of tetaaus? No; the
absence of a continuity of symptoms between .those two attaoK^*— I amspttking of tetanna

genenlly?

Lord Cakfbbi^i^ — The Attomer-Geneni] asks yxm if, aceordhi^ to the symptoms
described by Klimbeth Mills, yon think tiie occasion was' tetanus ? I hare said no. — ^Not
of any sort of tetanus ? I mean the tetanus of disease.

The Aftomty-Gemral. — Are yon confining yonrsrif -to idiopathic and tromatic tetanus?
Lord Campbelj^ — ^This gentleman began by saying he only acknowled^d these two
sorts of tetanns, thevefbie this does not come within either.

The Attorney' Oenend, — ^Assuming tetanus to be synonymous with spasmodic action of

the mosdes; was there in that sense tetanus on Monday night ? No doubt there was

spasmodic action of the muscles. — But there was not what you would call either idio-

pAluc or tromatic tetanus on ihe Mdndaynjrfit? No. — Just state why ?" The sudden

onset of the spasms and rapid subsidence. — l^e sudden onset and rapid subsidence are

not in your opinion consistent with what you call the true form of tetanus ? No. — Is

thersaform of tetanus also called hysteric tetanus f Yes, that is rather hysteria com-

1^ with spasmS/ or tetanic symptoms. — Does that sometimes end fatally ? No, I do

M know an instance of it. — It is confined for the most part to the female sex ? I do not

know an instanoe of a male ; possibly there may be. — Do you know whether certain

poisons produce tetanus? Yes^ — What poisons are there which produce that effect'?

Kox vomica. — -Throii^hits poisoas the stryohniaand the bmohna, only the bruchsia is of a

Bulder- character ? Yes. — Have- you ever seen a case of human or;animai life destroyed

by strychnia ? Nou^-Whtat other poismis ate there that produce that e&efe; have you ever

seenany? No, I hare not.

Cross-examined by Mr. Serjeant Shea,.

Ton haTe meatioiiedyonr' experience iscomfiBed to. tromatio tetanus; have youknoimi
ihat description of tetanusanse from any disease of the spnai covd? Spasms I have
^^ arise from disease of^e spinal covd.^ — Would not any inritatiottrof the spinal co^d,
the irritation of any of : its atherent . nerves, be likely to 'produce tetanus? Itmight.^^
Berbaps you -vrill explain what you mean by atherent; I take it from a book? Nerves
proceeding to the spinal cord. — ^You have stated your opinion that almost constantly tro-
ntatic tetanus conunences by lock*jaw with greater or less violence or intensity : do you
^eewith this opinion of Dr. Watson, in Mi ' Lectures on the Principles and Praetioe
of Physic/ '* that in four cases, perhaps^ out of.fivev tetsania begins with trismus or loeifi*
jaw?" X think I do.^~<WithrrefereBCe to< the causes whiehmay produce: all the ^mptoms
of tetaxuc convulsions, do you a^ree with Dr, Wattonythat it may arise from causes as
slight as these, the atioking of a fishhboue, a slight, wounds of the^earl^ a mnsket^shol^
^ mere stroke by a whip4ash under the; ^e^' firomithe cutting of a corn, from a bite on
the finger by a taaae sparrow, from the extraction of a tooth, Irom the operation of cup*
I^gi and simple ifa^igs -of that, character?^ Ea^cept, perhaps^ fromr the concussion of the
l&usiset-ball, I do; aUexoept that — ^With reiqieet to ^le rapidity of its accession after' the
injury to whiehrit may be attributed, do you know by your reading that a case occurred
^ Edinburgh where a- negro-servant lacerated his thumb by a fraettire of a china plate,
^d wasfinstantlyv.wUle the guests were, at dinner, seized whh tetanic symptoms ?
TkiAttome^'^Generah — I have taken some pains to ascertain how that case was got»
liord Cabtpbcll. — But 'this is not the mode in which a falct can be proved^
The Attorru^rOfeneraL — ^I.am prepared to meet that^case.if it is set up.
Mr. Serjeant >S^0)-i—{n< your opinion could tromatic tetapiofl occor as shortly as a quar^
^r of ZA hour 4iifter a/ .slight iajury ? I know of no weU-^anthealiQated instance of that
kind — ^You told my friend you wrote a.treaXiae(-on,tetaAua, which I see obtuned the Jack*
sonian priae for the year ,18345 did you- inquire into this case before you gave it as an
instance ? . I did.—*' Another rapidly fatal case is. mentioned by the late Professor Robert-
^n of £dinbargh; a^negro haying scratched his tshnmb with a piece of brolMu china, was
''^ized with tetanuSy.and in a^^uarter of an .hoar after the injury he was dead" ? I referred
^ the authority as fi*r. as 1 oould, but I did not find any reference to it except in the^
p^<!yel«pfBdia; whealwrote^ that boo& I w^aS'a young: ma& of twenty-two years of age;
1 have now maturer eiiperienee and ^greater judgmeat

The Attomeij'-^eneraL — I am. prepared: tosfaowthere'ne^r was a Professor Robertson
^t Bdinburgh at that'tsme- ; it ir taken frena Bees* fittcyel<^»dia, aoid is fiMind nowhere
^se.

112 TRIAL OF WILLIAM PALMER.

Mr. Serjeant Shee. — ^It is impossible lor me to cross-exftmine in such a case as this
except from books; I do not complain of what has passed about it. — Yoa say idiopathic
tetanus has not come under vonr notice, although you are surgeon to the Ix)ndon Hos-
pital ; but I dare say you will tell us idio|]iathic tetanus would not be likely to bring the
patient to the hospital as much as a sudden wound leading to tromatic tetanus ? Not so
likely, certainly.— In truth the idiopathic tetanus would pos^bly have come more likely
in the first instauM under the Botioe of a physician than a surgeon, would it not? Cer-
tunly.

Lord Cabipbell. — Have you known any case of idiopathic tetanus ia this country ?
Yes, I have heard and read of such cases. ^ . . , ,

Mr. Serjeant Shee, — Do not you know that veiy lately there was a case in thetluondon
Hospital in which tetanus came on so rapidly that it was referred to strychnia,, and it
was thought necessary to examine the stomach of the patient to see whether stryohaia
existed? I knew that before the history of the case was investigated.-r-D^ you not
know, the body being examined, no strychnia was found ? I have -hear/d m. — 'And do
you not also know, on a full examination of the body, symptoms of old ayphilitic ulcers
on the arms were discovered ? I do know that sores were discovered.

Lord Campbeli^. — Did you superintend this case yourself? No, I did ^ not, niy Lord ;
it was not my patient.— Did you personally see the patient? No, it was Otfly in the
hospital half an hour.

Mr. Serjeant Shee, — Do yott know who did ? The house-surgeons, "who are now in
court. — ^Then I need not trouble you more about that case : you say that a syphilitic sore
would not be very Hkely, in your opinion, to lead to tetanus, but might not the irritation
of a syphilitic sore by wet, cold, drink, mercury, or mental excitement lead to tetanic
symptoms? I do ntot think it is -very likely; I think the irritation likely to leaji to any-
thing of that kind may be produced from friction, as in the case in the hospital -ta whieh
you alluded ; but syphilitic sores are not much exposed to friction, in the throat, I mean.
— ^Would YOU class that sort of hurt, the friction from a sore, under the class of tromatic
or idiopathic ? The irritation from a sore would £iirly justify the Qase being termed
tromatic.^ — It is impossible to classify everything under a particular class ; those ^re terms
conveniently and accurately describing the connnes of the two diseases ; there is no very
distinct confine between the two ? I hardly know the beiit of your, question. — Do not
cases occur which it is difficult to class under the head of tromatic as distinguished
from idiopathic tetanus? Very rarely. — I observe you class the irritation of the intes-
tines under idiopathic ^ is that so? Yes. — ^And yet it can hardly be called self^-geoe-
rating, which is ■ the characteristic of * the idiopathic : is not epilepsy sometimes
accompanied with tetanic convulsions and symptoms? Not teltanic' convulsions. — By
prolonged contractions; continuous contractions as contradistinguished froni spas-
modic? That is not .the character of the spasms of epilepsy.— But of the contractions;
are not the oontraotioiu of epilepsy sometimes coatinuoos, so that the hand will ha
twisted into, various forms, and remain rigidly fixed in those forms ? Not continuously'
— ^But for five or teu minutes together ? I think not.— 'As to convulsions generally, with-
out reference to wounds,, does it uQt frequently happen that convulsions attributable to
no cause, the trace of which ^annot be found in the body after dekth by any^ disease cr
lesion of any kind, are known to have occurred in the most violent and 'spastic way, and
to have exhibited the appearance of tetanic convulsions ? No appearance of the kind

in some cases of the most violent and spastic nature, frequently of some continuance, ihc
relaxation being of brief duration, and scarcely observable, in others nearly or alfogfethcr
approaching to tetanic" ? Is this^pilepsy ?— It is undeb tke head of-** General Convul-
sions." I should rather speak from my own observation t I have not observed anything o^J
the kind. — Is this definition of general convulsions correct hi your <ypitai6ii ? [The' fearnm
Counsel then read an extract eommeneing ** Frequent and involuhtary eon'i^raction," dcini
to the words "uncertain intervals/'l It may be a correct definitldfa; but one has to ^ead
over very carefully a statement of that kind before one can give It'wBolly <Sne*H sanction.
—Does It not often happen that a patient dies of convnlilions, spa^modi^ iii the^nse of
^ their being tumultuous and alternating, and tonic in the sease of exhibltifag ft fcontinnons
rigidity, and yet after death "ho disease is found ? Are you sperftiTig of {Jhildren or adults ?
—Of adults ? I do not think it does often happen.— Does ft •»<)metiines ? I know of no
instance.— Do not you know from, your reading and science, ad a writer on tetanus, ana a

gentleman who has attended to this desciiptioa of complaint, that that is bo? I do not.—
5, 1 read it from your own book : " Tetanus is a functional disease of the nervous

Is this true.

FOURTH, DAY, Mat 17, 1866. 113

system, that is to say, a disease usaocompanied irith nay peroeptiUe lesion of stroctore,
the nature of which, although essentiallv distinct from inflammation, is completely on-
](nown, and there are, therefore, no moroid changes peculiar to tetanus and by which it
can be recognised '* ? If your previous question, as well as this, had reference to morbid
appearances, I have no hesitation in saying persons die of tetanus and other diseases
without the morbid appearance after death. — ^In respect of general convulsions not so
marked as to be properly classed as tetanic, does it not sometimes happen that they attack
suddenly ; that they are sometimes preceded by premonitory symptoms and sometimes not :
do they sometimes happen suddenly without any premomtory symptoms, and sometimea
are they preceded by premonitory symptoms ? I do not think so ; but I have not really
observed the case. — 1 must ask you whether you agree in this : whether in convulsions not
so marked as to be tetanic, they are n^t constantly preceded by nausea, retching, and
vomiting, pain and distension of the stomach and flatulence of the stomach and bowels, and
other dyspeptic symptoms ? The class of cases you allude to do not come under my con-
sideration as a hospital surgeon. — ^Do you know enough of it to know that general convul-
sions are often accompanied with yelling and shrieking? Yes, I think it is very likely. —
And do you know also that they frequently terminate in death,, and that the proximate
cause of that death is spasms of the respiratory muscles, inducing asphyxia ? No, I do not.
— I am requested to ask you where are the pacconean glands ; are they m the spinal sheath?
Tfo. — Where are they ? In one of the vessels of the brain you will find them.

Re-examined by the Attorney-General,

These general convulsions, about which my friend asked you some general questions, are
distinguishable ^om tetanus, properly so called, are they not ? Yes.-^Orald a medical
practitionef , who saw a case of general convulsions, be able at once, If a man of competent
skill, to know the difference between such symptoms as those and of tetanus, which yon.
have been talking of? Yes ; there is generally loss of oonsciouBness*"— Is one of the eha-
raeteristic filatures of tetanus that the consciousness is not affected? Yes.

Dr. ROBERT TODD sworn.— Examined by the Attoi-ney-GeneraL

You are a physician ? I am.— How long have you been in practice ? Twenty-five
years. — Yon are a physician to King's College Hospital, and have been so for many years?
Ves. — ^Do you also lecture on Physiology and Anatomy ? I have done so. — Have you
directed your attention to the disease called tetanus ? Yes.— Have yon lectured upon it ?
Y^. — And published your lectures, I believe? Yes; and the diseene of ^e nervous
system generally. — Do you agree with the last witness, Mr. Curling, in Ms definition of
idiopathic and tromatic tetanus ? Entirely.— -Have you had any opportunity yooraelf of
witnessing cases of idiopathic tetanus? I have seen two. casea of what seemed to be
idiopathic tetanus. — It is a rare thing, I believe, in this country ? Very rare.

Lord Campbell. — How do you define idiopathic tetanus ? I define idiopathic tetanus
to be that -form of tetanus which is produced without any external wound; and apparently
from internal causes ; from a constitutional cause.

The Attomey-GetieraL-^Yovi would not include in it, I ptesume, a case of tetanus
resulting from poison ? I think myself that the term tetanus ought not to be applied to
cases of poisoning, for the symptoms are so essentially distinct from the disease. — Would
you call those symptoms tetanic symptoms ? I would designate them tetanic, in order to
distijDguish the character of the convulsions. — ^Have you had, under your own observation,
cases of tromatic tetanus ? Yes. — ^Except that cases of tromatic tetanus arise f^om some
lesio^ of the body, are the symptoms much tiie same in cases of idiopathic tetanus and
tromatic tetanus ? Precisely the same. — How does the disease usually begin ? It begins
with stiffness, as Dr. Curling described it, about the jaw.— Do tiie symptoms then extend
themselves tp the other muscles of the trunk of the body ? Yes. — Do they come in, in the
first instance^ in tiie more aggravated form, or do they begin and gradually develope
themselves ? They gradually develope themselves.— "When once the disease has begun
is there any intermission? There are remissions, but I should#say not complete. — A re-
mission of the severity ? A dimiuution of the severity of the symptoms.— But not a total
subsidence? The patient does- not e]q>ress himself as completely well, and quite,
com^rtable, and at ease; I speak from my own experience solely.— As fiir as your
knowledge goes, what is the xumoA period which the disease takes from its commencement
to its termination ? I think the. cases may be divided, in that respect, into two classes ;
there is an acute class and a okronie dass ; the acute cases will terminate in the course of
three or four days, the chronic cases will go on from nineteen to twenty-two oi* twenty-
three days, perhaps even longer*— What is the shortest case you eVer knew of? I do
not think I nave ever known a ease within four days in my own experience, but 1 know
some cases are related«-^I omitted toask you'in these' ^es of tetanus, properly speakmg,

H

114 TRIAL OF WILLUK PALMER.

are the ezticmit!e» afieeted as irell as Ae muscles of the body ?' The extremities are
aflboted, but not so severely as the mttsdes of the tmnk or the abdomen. — At what stage
of the disease does the affection of the extremities come on ? Late. — The trismus, the
locking of the jav, is that an eariy or a late symptom? Barly. — ^Does epilepsy produce
tetanus or tetanic symptoms ? No ; sometimes epilepsy will produce convulbions, and
sometimes the convulsions from ^ilepsy assume somewhat of a tetanic character, but
they are essentialW distinct fhym tetanus. — Will you state in what they are different,"^
that we may get nd of any confusion on that ground ? When the epileptic convulaons
assume somewhat of the tetanic form it is quickly over, not continuous.-— How is the con-
seionsness of the patient affected in epileptic convulsions? In epilepsy there is an
abolition of consciousness for the time. — ^Is that a general distinguishing feature ? It is
a- decided dbtinguishing feature of epilepsy.— 'As distinct from tetanus ? As distinct
fh>m all other convulsive diseases and from tetanus. — Is Apoplexy ever combined with
tetanic convulsions? No, I should say not; perhaps I may be allowed to state that
'sometimes when there is e Aision of blood into the brain, ana a particular portion of the
brain is involved, an apoplectic patient may exhibit something of a tetanic convulsiou ;
tile musdes of the brain are thrown into short tetanic convulsions. — How would the
consciousness be in such a case ? The consciousness would be completely destroyed. —
Tim have heard the symptoms described which accompanied ^s gentleman's seiruise
and death, and also the appearances after death, the post-mortem examination : are you
of opinion, in the case in question, there was either apoplexy or epilepsy ? No.

It was suggested by Mr. Serjeant Shee fltr this^ stage of the inquiry that the depoation of
JiSsi Bamford should be read.

The Attomey^Qenerai acquiesced in. the proposition, and stated if was his intention to
eall Mr. Bamford as a witness if the state* of his health pennitted it — ^You have been in
attendance on Mr. Bamford ? Yes, I have seen him witn Dr. Tweedie. — ^When did you
see him ? I saw him yesterday. — ^He has had a severe attack of English cholera? Yes.
— ^Was he in danger ? Indeed, I was very apprehensive about him for some hours.

Dr. TWEEDIE sworn.— Examined by the Attorney-General,

You have been in attendance, also, on Mr. Bamford ? I have. — ^You have seen him
to-day ? I saw him this morning, — He has been labouring under a severe attack of Eng)-
Ush cholera? Yes.

liord Camfbkll. — Is he able to attend in this court to^y, to give evidenoe as a wit-
ness ? I should 81^ decidedly not.

( The depoeittfm of Dr. Ban^ord taken before ihe Ccfnm^r wa» then- ready as folhtes) .-

" I attended the late MV. Cook at the request of Mr. William Palmer. I first saw
him about 3 o'clock on Saturday, the 1 7th of November, when he was suffering from
violent vomiting, (he stomach being in tiiat irritable state that it would not contain a tea-
spoonAil of milk^ There was per&ct moisture of Uie skin, and he -was quite sensible. I
prescribed medicine for him, and Mr. Palmer went up to my house and waited until I
had made it up, and then took it away. I prescribed a saline medicine, to be taken in an
effervescing state. Between 7 and 8 o'clock in the evening Mr. Palmer again requested
me to visit Mr. Cook. The sickness still continued, everything being ejected which he
took into his stomach. I gave him two small pills as a slight opiate. Mr. Palmer
took the pills from my house. I did not accompany him, nor do I know what be-
oame of the pills. On the following morning. (Sunds^) Mr. Palmar agaia oalled, and
asked me to accompany him. Mr. Cook's sickness snll continued. I remained about
10 minutes. Everything he took that morning was ejected from his stomach. Svery-
thing he threw up was as clear as water, except some coffee which he had taken. Mr.
Palmer had administered some pills before I saw Mr. Cook on Saturday, which had
pui^ed him several times. Between 6 and 7 o'clock in the evening I again visited the

"' "^ ' "^^ * ' *'" " ' "went on Mon-

him a draught
gave him ease. I did. not see him agaiu until
Tuesday night, when Mr. Palmer called for me. I examined Mr. Cook in the presence
of Mr. Jones and Mr. Palmer, and I observed a change in him. He was irritable and
troubled in his mind. His pulse was &*m, but tremidous, and between 80 and 90^ He
threw himself down on the bed and turned his face away^ He said he would have no
mora pills nor take any more medicine. Alter they had left the room Mr. Palmer asked
me to make two more pills similar to those on the previous night, which I did^ and he
then asked me to write the directions on a slip of paper *, and I gave the pills to Mr.
Palmer. The effervescing mixture contained 20 grains of carbonate of potash, 2. drachms
of compound tincture of cardamine, and 2 drachms of simple sjrrup, together with 15
grains of tartaric acid for each powder. I never gave Mr. Cook a grain of antimony.

FOURTH DAY, May 17, 1856. 115

I did: not see the preparations after they "were taken away by Mr. Paliner; Mr. Cook
did not say lie had taken the pills which He had prepared, but he expressed a wish
on the Snnday and' Monday night»' to ha^e the pills. His skin was moist, and there
was not the least &ver about him. When I saw the deceased on Monday he did not
say ijiat he had been ill on the Sunday night, but Mr. Palmer told me that he had
been ilL I considered death to have been the result of congestion of tiie brain when
the post-mortem examination was made, and I do not see any reason to alter that opinion.
I have attended other patients for Mr. Palmer. I attended' Mrs. Palmer some days
' before her decease ; also two children, and a gentleman ft-om London who was on a visit
at Mr. Palmer^s house, and who*9did not live many hours after I was called in. The
▼hole of those patients died. Mr. Palmer first made an application to me for a certifi-
cate of Mr. Cook's death on the following Sunday morning, when I objected, saying,
*He is your^ patient.' I cannot remember his reply ; but he wished me to fill up the
Wftiflcate, and I <tid so. We had no conversation at that time as to the cause of death.

igidity of* the limbs. Drowsiness is a prelude to apoplexy.
atkaeas on the first: two days to a disordered stomach. Mr. Cook never sent for me

Dr. TODD recalled. — Further examined by the Attomey-iGensrcd,
Having heard that evidence read, and taking it into consideration, togethervvith all yon
Ittve heard about the symptoms from the other witnesses, are you of opinion that dealii was
Brodueed by i^wplexy ? Certainly not*— Or from epilepsy ? Nor from epilepsy. — ^Hstite
you ever-known tetanus arise from syphilitic sore ? Never. — Or from sore throat? No.
—There are poisons which will produce tetanus^ are there not ? Yes.— Or probably you
vonld call them tetanic convulsions ? Yes, tetanic convulsions. — ^There are poisons whicli
^11 produce that foim. of tetanus which you call tetanic convulsions'? Yes; — Which is
the principal of those poisons ? The wax vomica*

Lord Campbbijl. — ^The mue vomica we understand produces stryohiuaand bmchsia?
Those poisons whidi contain as their active principle strychnia and braieii8iar*--Those are
two poisons found in different plants^ Precisely.

The Attometf-General, — ^Youhave never seen yourself acase of death in the human subject
from tiiai poison? Never. — ^Have you seenranimal life destroyed by stryohnaaf - Frequently »
-7-What is the smallest quantity that you ever saw administered to an animal, to take away^
life? 1 can scarcely charge my memory^ because in those cases we have given a largish
dose, soas to shorten life as much as possible, to bring on the symptoms as; quickly as pos*
sible, half a grain perhaps. — Do you know at the present moment, from your knowledge on
^e subject, what is the smallest, dose that wiU destroy animal life ? I should not like to
l^ve the human subject a^uarter of a grain. — Are you of opinion half a grain would destroy
^e ? I think it is not unlikely in some subjects.— I may assume that a grain would destroy
life ? I think so^ — What animals have you seen the experiment tried on ? Cats and dogs,
and frogs. — ^What is the smallest quantity that will destroy a cat or a dog ? I should think
balf a grain would destroy a cat. — Will you be good enough to describe the symptoms
▼hich show themselves in animals after strychnia has been administered to them, from
the oonunencement of the demonstration of the poison down to the time of the death of the
^'lumal ? The symptoms consist in strong tetanic convulsions. — ^Stop one moment ; if
you administer a g^n to a cat or a dog, how long would it take, supposing in the one
^^^ you administered it in a liquid form, and in the other suppose you gave a pill ? I
^^^'nnot answer that question satisfactorily ; ][ have not looked at that. — How have you
*en it administered when given for the purpose of taking^ away life ? I have generally
given it in solution^ — It would act more speedily given in solution ? That was my sup-
position ; I suppose all remedies of that sort act more sj)eedily given in solution. — How
soon have you seen it affect the animal after it has been given in solution ? That very
much depends on the amount of the dose ; a large dose would begin very soon. — How
soon? In the course of 10 minutes. — Take a more moderate dose ; how long would that
^? Half an hour to an hour.—When it began to show its effects, what would be the
symptoms ? Spasmodic action of the muscles,, chiefly of the trunk, the spine, the spinal
ninscles, producing a very marked opisthotonos as it is. called, where the spine is
^own back, the head thrown back, and the trunk bowed in a very marked manner. —
How are the extremities^ affected ? They are generally stiffened, jerked out, violent
jerks ; the muscles are rendered stiff and rigid. — From the spasms ? Yes. — And does
that stiffness remain? It does. — ^When once set in, it does not relax and, commence
again? When once set in, it does not perfectly relax. — ^And fresh paroxyMus come in?
^ways attended with the peculiar curvmg back of the head and neck, and of the spine.

H 2

116 TRUL OF WILLIAM PALMER.

— What sort of motion is it of the muscles when in motion from that cause ? It is a
rigid jerk. — Would you call it a jerking motion ? Yes. — ^The extremities, the legs or
feet of the animals, are they forced out of their natural construction ? Decidedly .«— In
what way ? They are powerfully stiffened out, distended, erery now and then power-
fhlly hent, and jerked out again. — How long does it generally last before death pots an
end to those struggles ? That would depend also on the intensity of the disease ; I should
think that death would be over yery soon, indeed from a quarter of an hour to half
an hour, unless it is a small dose ; then the symptoms gradually subside. — That is to say,
if it is a dose not sufficient to destroy life ? Not sufficient to destroy life. — Is there, in
your opinion, a marked difference, and if so what is it, between such a case where death
ensues after taking strychnia, and a case of tetanus such as you were describing just now
from idiopathic or tromatic cause ? I think the distinction is very marked. — -Wherein ?
The continuity of the symptoms in strychnine poisoning is yery characteristic ; as long as
the poisonous influence lasts the symptoms last, but the poisonous influence will subside
after a time. — ^You mean, if it is not strong enough to cause death ? If it is not strong
enough to cause death, and then the symptoms do not return ; in tetanus, the symptoms
from the commencement are continuous, they go on as long as the patient's powers are
capable of enduring. — Is the shortness of the duration of the symptoms a circumstance
that would strike you ? The shortness of the duration of the symptoms is decidedly in
fayour of strychnine poisoning. — ^Brnchsia, I belieye, is analogous to strychnia in itsefiects,
but it is weaker ? It is. — It is l-6th of the strength of strychnia? I do not know. — Are
there any other poisons that produce conyulsions of a tetanic character? No other
poisons that I know of. — You heard the symptoms described which attended this gentle-
iSnan's death ; in your opinion, are they referable to idiopathic or tromatic tetanus ? No.
-^You say you neyer saw a person die from the administration of strychnia? No. —
J9aye you seen a person suffer from the consequences of an oyer dose r I haye. — One
instance, or more ? One I perfectly recollect ; 1 am not sure whether I haye seen an-
other. — ^The patient then had taken too much? Yes. — ^Then it was giyen medicinally?
Yes. — ^What was the effect then? There was the opisthotonos, Such as I haye described
in the case of animals, there was consciousness perfectly retained ; in that particular case
there was also dilatation of the pupils. — Any contraction of the muscles of the trunk?
A peculiar conyulsion of the muscles of the trunk. — Any of the limbs ? The limbs were

sufficed out.

Lord Campbell. — ^Was there any oppression in breathing? There was an oppression
of the breath.

The Attorney-General, — I take it the difficulty of breathing is common to both tetanus

properly so called and to tetanic convulsions ft'om strychnia? Certainly. — From the

effect produced on the respiratory muscles? Yes.— Was there in the case you are

«peakiug of, where the patient took too much, any action in the jaw ? My impression

is if there was, it was yery slight. — Does it occur to you, as indicating anrthing with

regard to the identity with or distinction from the case of real tetanus, that in the case

•of Mr. Cook he was able to swallow a liquid ? I think it is an important distinction, not

so much that he was able to swallow as that he seems to have been able to swallow

^ sufficiently easy, and there was no rigidity of the muscles of the jaw, none of that

peculiar description of continuance which is characteristic of the proper tetanus. — The

'-J«tanus of disease or of wound? Yes.— How long was the patient affected who took the

" over-dose of strychnia? Not more than an hour or a couple of hours.- Then it subsided

«nd went off? Yes.— Judging from the cases you have seen of animal life destroyed by

strychnia, and the case of your patient who took too much of it on the one hand, and the

cases of idiopathic and tromatic on the other, having heard the symptoms described

which attended Mr. Cook's attack and death, to what class should you ascribe his death?

were the symptoms those of idiopathic or tromatic tetanus, or were the symptoms those

pf tetanus from strychnia ? I think the symptoms were those of tetanus from strychnia.

Cross-examined by Mr. Grove,
I believe the proximate effect of tetanus, whether caused by idiopathic or tromatic
tetanus or strychnia, is the same on the nerves leading from the spine? It is not
unlikely it is so.— The particular affection of the nerves is, I presume, unknown ? It is.
-Do not convulsions pass through every grade imperceptibly from what are called mi Id
chronic convulsions to what are called violent tetanic sjjmptoms ; do they not necessarily
pass through these different grades? Do you mean m one case ?-In the disorder of
convulsions are there not cases of very slight affection, others more senous, wid so on;
oases sloping into each other from nuld convulsions to ngid ^tanus ? Yes.-No line of
demarcation absolutely can be pointed out in the character of the disorder from mild
convulsions to tetanus ? In particular cases there arei— My question is on an observa-

FOURTH DAY, May 17, 1856. 117

tion of the cases of the chara^iter of disease, are there not cases from every degree of mild
or cJironic convulsions to ri^d tetanus ? Chronic convulsions may be severe as well as
mild. — Chronic and tonic are different ? Yes. — Do not the cases pass as it were from
the one into the other ? are there not symptoms of difference between the two ? You
may have simultaneously a chronic and a tonic, but not in the same muscle. — What
meanid^ do you attach to chronic ? Chronic is more the irregular action o^ the muscle,
stimulating somewhat more the violent action. — What is tonic ? Tonic is a rigidity of
muscle. — ^Mope or less persistent ? Yes. — ^I believe you have written a work on * Diseases
of the Brain and Nervous System ? ' I have published some lectures. — I find in that you
say *' that tetanus may be produced through the blood, is shown by the results of the
administration of strychnine, which exactly imitate ihe tetanic symptoms in every
respect ; so that you may at will develop the phenomena of tetanus in an animal by
^vlng him stryclmine, or injecting it into his blood, but you cannot cause it by external
mjuries ; '* there you say it imitates the tetanic symptoms in every respect ; do you
a&ere to that opinion ? I adhere to the opinion that the symptoms exactly resemble
the tetanic convulsions, the convulsions of tetanus ; the statement is incorrect if it be
interpreted to mean that it produces the exact phenomena of the disease in a clinical
sense. — You have been describing a case of tromatic tetanus in this book, and then you
say ** that tetanus may be produced through the blood is shown by the results of the
administration of strychnine, which exactly imitate the tetanic symptoms in every
r^pect ; '* that is the symptom I presume you have been describing ; you further say,
" We may ask what is the nature of the morbid process set up in these centres ? to this
it jDAj be confidently replied, as the result of repeated examinations, that it is not
inflammation, nor anything allied thereto ; " this is the passage : ** And it may with
quite as much certainty be affirmed that it is a situation identical with that which
strychnine produces ; " do you adhere to that ? 1 have no doubt the peculiar irritation
of the nerves in tetanus is identical with the peculiar irritation of the nerves in strychnine
poisoning. — I believe tromatic tetanus admits of a great variety of symptoms, does it not?
I should not say a great variety. — Sometimes one set of muscles are affected, at other
times others ? I do not know there is such a very marked difference as that. — Are there
not noany cases with which you are familiar of tromatic tetanus where the wounded
limb is affected ? Yes, but the limbs became affected late.

Lord Campbell. — ^You know no instance of the limbs being affected before the jaw ?
I do not recollect any.

Mr. Grove, — ^Are you speaking from what you have seen or read ? From what I have
seen or in what I have read I do not recollect any instance where the limbs were affected
before the jaw. — Are you familiar with Dr. Curling's book ? I am sprry to say 1 am
not. — ^In the case in your book you state, ** It fortunately happened that we were able to
have a post-mortem examination under very favourable circumstances ; it was made only
four hours after death, when, if there had been any morbid appearances, they would
have . heen free from the fallacy of post-mortem change ; " is not the fact of a . recent
examination of the spinal cord in tetanic affections of importance, an examination shortly
after death ? In a pathological point of view it is.y Would it not be liable to the fallacy
which you speak of here, post-mortem change, if it were deferred as late as two montmi
after death? There is to a certain extent a fallacy; there are morbid appearances
prodiw^d by wounds after death, which sometimes simulate diseased conditions before
death*

Lerd Campbell. — If there are no diseased appearances when examined some time
after death, eould there have been diseased appearances if the examination had been prior
toitf I thii^, if certain diseased appearances had existed before death, they would be
reeogliisable as long as the spinal cord was itself to be recognised.

Mr.' enrobe. — Decomposition would alter the structure of the spinal cord ? The signs
of decomposition are sufficiently evident, and they would be distinguished. — Supposing
, the spine to be affected by decomposition, would not what may be called the diseasea
softening of the spine previous to death be confused or obliterated ? You would not be
able to speak with certajnty as to sioiple softening, if the examination had been long after
death. You say in your book, ** There was however," in the case which you have
spoken of, "as I had anticipated, no morbid appearance which seemed to offer any
explanation of the disease ; the nervous centres, both brain and spinal cord, were per-
fectly healthy ; perhaps the brain contained a little more blood than usual : a &ot not to
be wondered at when we consider the violence of the paroxysms ; the grey matter of the
brain was perfectly natural, and its demarcation peculiarly distinct: indeed, the remark-
able . distinctness may have been morbid, and may have indicated an undue functional
activity of those parts \*' you say, with reference to the same subject, '* This case illns-

U8 TBXAL OF WILLIAM PALM£R.

trates the little lu:^e we lutye of obtaiAinj^ bv post-mostem eiamination any other than
negative informatioD as regards the particular state of the nervous system:" speaking
with regard to tetanus, is it not that the indications in tetanic disorders are slight, and
difficult of seizure ? Not during life. — But after death ; I am asking you with regard to
the post-mortem? ^Xes, there is nothing in the post-mortem examination on which any
one could positively say that the patient died from the ordinary disease of tetanus.— If
granules or small bodies were discovered in the membrane of the spine, would that be
considered as not an unlikely cause of tetanus ? No. — You think it would not ? I think
granules on the spinal cord, such as I have heard, are not likely to cause tetanus. — Are
you aware, in several cases the deposition of small bony patches has been observed in
the anacroid tunic in cases of tetanus? I have observea such myself in cases where
there has been no tetanus. — I am asking you as to cases of tetanus where those have
been observed ? I am not aware of that. — ^Do vou know any cases which have been
attended by Mr. Travers ? No. — In the cases of the animals to whom strychnia was
administered, did you observe, after the attack had come on, a remarkable intolerance of
touch, they could not bear to be touched ? I could scarcely call it an intolerance of
touch : by touching them, the spasms were apt to be excited. — Did you observe, in any
of those cases of animals, that they went off mto a second spasm immediately they were
touched? Yes. — ^Is not that commonly observed in animals pToisoned by stryt^nioe?
Tes. — Did not they retain that identity for some time after the passing off of the fit'?
As long as the influence of the poison lasts, I think that remains. — For a considerable
time : some hours ? I cannot specify time ; as long as the influence of the poison acts.
—Can you give it to me approximately ? I cannot tell. — Did you examine the animals
that were killed by.strychDine anatomically? Yes. — Did you observe the heart? Yes.
— Was not the right side of the heart generally full ? I think not.

LordCAMPBEix. — ^How were they ? Empty, I think, generally ; and the Jieart con*
tracted.

Mr. (hove. — Can you call to mind sufficiently the state of the .heart in the majority of
cases you have examined? In the majority oi cases I have seen, I have seen the heart
contracted. — When did you see those cases ? At various times. — Recently ? Not very
lately ; I have not made any experiments lately. — ^Did you take any memorandums of the
aymptoms of the examination ? I dare say I did at the time ; I cannot lay my hands on
them. — ^When were the last you saw on the subject? Some years ago. — Can you under-
take to speak distinctly from your recollection as to the state of the heartf Yes.— And
that it was generally empty? Yes, not di6tendedd~On both sides? On both sides.-^
What do you consider the cause of death in those cases where stryidinine was adminir
atered ? I think the cause of death is partly due to the difficulty of action of the4respii»>
tory muscles, but chiefly due to a general nervous exhaustion which, liie violence •of the
paroxysm produces. — ^Would not the difficulty of action of the respiratory muscles pro-
ducing deam .tend to leave the heart full ? I do not think it has aspbyxis. — TFhen I thuik
I may take you as differing from the great mass of authorities on strjrohnia ? I do not
know ; I think there are differences of opinion on tiiat subject. — By Dr. Taylor, and
various other authorities, is it not generally given, on the ground that asphyxia is the
oause of death? I think it is not generally laid down that animals die with tme
arofayaua^ — ^After describing the symptoms, Dr. Taylor says, ^'The symptoms soon cease
aner a short interval; the chest is «o fixed as to give it an appearance of suffocation;
after several of such attacks, the patient dies asphyxiated '*' do you agree with that?
No, I do not agree with that. — ^Nor with any of those medical aatiiorities who take the
same view ? I think if animals died asphyxiated, you would have invariably the ri^
^e of the heart full of blood, which is not the caae.^ — I find Dr. Chcistison,.in:his hook
describing the paroxysm, says, '* At length a fit takes >plaee more violent .than aJOiy befoEO
it, and the ammal .perishes suffocated,'' which means pretty much the same thing as
asphyxiated, does it not? The compression is often used loosely, I think. — ^Both expres-
sions are suffoqated? I think "suffocated" is used more loosely than "asphyxiated;"
a person with spasm of the glottis will die with what is called asphyxia. — If the animal
dies asphyxiated, the right side of the heart is filled with blood ? I think that is^ the
usual residt. — Do you know that morphia produces convulsions ? Persons sometimes
have convulsions after poison by morphia ; I think tfaey are more of an epileptic cha-
racter; I never witnessed them. — ^You know such from your reading? Yes. — ^Morphia
is a vegetable alkali, I believe, as strychnine is ? — Yes. — ^What would be the time in
which, after morphia, symptoms of convulsions would come on ? I should think very
late.— -Later than in strychnia ? It depends on the dose entirely. — Generally, would you
think it later than strychnia? I cannot answer the question ; it is not a subject I have
devoted attention tq. — -In any case of strychnia that you have observed, or had an opjpor-

POISaiH ftA^T, Umx 1%, 1856. 119^

taiatj of iritxu»8]iig,!liftTe yoa seen the paiozysm^ come on as late as an bonr.ancL aJhaJf
after the administration of the poiion ? I cannot answer ; I cannot say.

Lord CambbbUj. — ^You must. ask how the:poison was administered; whether in liqni^.
or how ?

. Mr. Orover^l aiikiin any case, whether taken in liqnid or otherwise, the parozysBts
have come on aslate as an hour and a half? I cannot remember. — Have you seen, in
cases of animals, the jaw fix«d (trismus) in- cases of strychnia poisoning? I think not,
in any marked way : I .have no doubt the muscles of the jaw may be affected to a cer-
tain extent, but not in the marked way that is the case in tetanus. — Can you recollect
enoogh to say whether trismus is not a frequent effect from strychnia ; I will not say an
invariable one?

Lord Campbeu^ — ^Hare you seen it ? I cannot positively charge my recollection on
that pomt.

Be-examined by the Attorney' General,

At all events, if it is a symptom, though not in a marked way, at what period of the
affection does it generally come on ? I should expect it would come on soon. — ^But you
haye not seen it? No ; it is not a marked symptom according to my observation. — Now,
▼baterer may be the true theory as to the emptiness of the heart, where the patient
diM from tetanus or tetanic convulsions, is it the general appearance after death that the
lieart should be empty ; I mean as resulting from that disease ; 1 am speaking generally ;
in death from what you call tetanus, do you expect to find the heart empty ? I should
Bot expect -to find anything peculiar about the heart. — In the cases that have come under
yoor observation, have you seen persons opened afterwards, and post-mortem examina-
tions held after death, where death has arisen from ordinary tetapus, in which the heart
has been usually found empty ? The heart is not filled ; I have no doubt blood is some-
times contained in the heart. — Did you find the distinction in that respect between the
ease of ordinary tetanus and the case of tetanic convulsions after strychnia ? IN'othing
Teiyi marked ; my impression is the heart became strongly contraetecL~*Do you mean
after strychnia ? Yes, more so than after ordinary tetanus.

I/ord GA]ipnBti«. — (Then the spasm extends to the heart ? The spasm, Ithink, extends
to the heart.

The Attomey»&eneraI, — ^That would expel the blood from the heart? That would
expel the blood from the heart ; though it might not expel all the blood, it would prevent
n^ent dilatation t>f the heart to receive its full supply. — My friend asked you whether
there were any cases of convulsions of the -milder form going up to the extreme olimax
oftatanic ri^dity; are the distinctions marked? would a medical practitioner have any
difficnity in knowing a case of general convulsions as distinguished from a case of tetanic
conTQlsions ? I think not. — ^You have said it would be desirable, in a pathological point
of view, to ex:amine the spinal cord recently after death, with a view to detect any ab-
nonnil condition of it : did you hear the description given by the gentlemen who did
examine it ? Yes. — ^From their description did it appear to you that those ports were in
snch a condition that any such indication of disease might have been discovered ? I think
so.—My friend spoke of bony patches ; would those have been discovered ? Certainly. —
Wottld there have been any difficulty in discovering them? T^one whatever ; they do not
nndergo any decomposition after death, at least not for a very cx)nsiderable time. — Taking
the examination at that period, you heard it mentioned, I dare say, that the extremities
manifested still the same rigidity ; that the muscles were of the same rigid kind ? Yes,
—Does that give you any i&a ? It struck me as a very remarkable feature in the case. —
In yhat respect? I .cannot speak with absolute certainty on the case, but.it is a feature
▼hich is quite new to me ; I doubt whether it occurs in ordinary tetanus. — ^Haye you
any means of knowledge in that respect ? I have only heard one fact, since this trial
began, which was a case in which a cat was poisoned by strychnine, and the muscles con-
timied to be rigid for six days after death.

Mr. Serjeant Shee, — ^You have not heard it on oath during the trial ? TCo.

The AUomey^General. — ^You did not see it yourself? I did not. — Can you tell me
whether in cases of ordinary tetanus that rigidity of the muscles continues for so long a
period ? I cannot ; I have inquired on -die point, and I cannot escertainthe fiiot.

Sir BENJAMIN BRODIE sworn.— Examined by Mr. James.

Sir 'Benjamin,Tb€lieve you were surgeon at St. George's Hospital for many years' ? Yes.
^You have had, I need not ask you, a very extensive practice ? A considerable practice.
—In the course of your practice have you had under your superintendence many cases of
death from tetanus? A. great many. — Is death from idiopathic tetanus in this country
frequent or rare ? According to my experience very rare. — The ordinary death from

120 TRIAL OP iriLLIAM PALMER.

tromatic tetftnut ? Yei.'—HaYe yoa attended during the trial careMly to the description
of the symptoms given on the Monday night and the Tuesday nieht attending the death
of Mr. Cook ? Yes, I attended to them. — In your opinion are 3ie symptoms those of
tromatic tetanus or not ? As far as the spasmodic contraction of the muscles goes, tbe
mnptoms resemble those of tromatic tetanus ; as to the course which the symptoms took,
that waf entirely different. — Did tou attend to the detail of the narration of the attack
on the Mondny night? Yes, I did. — And its oeanng, and the patient being comfortable
and composed dunng the Tuesday ? Yes. — ^And then the attack again about 10 minutes
before 12 on the Tuttday night? Yes. — Will you explain what you mean; in what
respect they are different from tromatic tetanus ? The symptoms of tromatic tetanus
always begin, as far as I have seen, very gradually; the stiffness of the lower jaw being,
I believe, invariably the symptom first complained of; at least, so it has been in my
experience : then the contraction of the muscles of the back is always a later symptom,

Senerally much later; the muscles of the extremities are affected in a much less
egree than those of the neck and trunk, except in some cases where the injury has
been in a limb, and an early symptom has been a spasmodic contraction of the muscles of
that limb ; I do not myself recollect a case in which, in ordinary tetanus, there was that
contraction of the muscles of the hand which I understand was stated to have existed in
this instance : then ordinary tetanus rarely runs its course in less than two or three days,
and often is protracted to a much longer period ; I know one ca^ only in which the
disease was said to have terminated in 12 hours.

Lord Campbell. — In so short a time as 12 hours ? But probably in that case the
early symptoms had been overlooked : then I never knew these symptoms of ordinary
tetanus to last for a few minutes, then subside, then come on again after 24 hours; I
think that those are the principal points of difference which I perceive between the sym-
ptoms of ordinary tetanus and those which I have heard described.

Mr. James, — Sir Benjamin Brodie, you are aware, of course, of the tetanus or tetanic
convulsions which are the result of strychnia ? I have not witnessed them. — ^But as a
surgeon do you know the effect on animal life ?

Lord Campbell. — ^Do you know of experiments on animal life by strychnine ? I have
not made any myself.

Mr. Jcanes, — In ^our opinion was this a disease of the ordinair kind of tetanus, either
tromatic or icUopathic ? I do not believe that death here arose from what we ordinarily
call tetanus, either idiopathic or tromatic. — Did you ever know a death from tetanus as
the result of sore throat ? Never. — Or the result of a chancre ? Never, I never heard of
it.-^Or any other form of syphilitic disease ? I never heard of a case. — ^In your judgment
are the symptoms of death consistent with a fit of apoplexy such as you have hearft
described? No, "they are not. — Or epilepsy ? Perhaps I had better say at once that I
never saw a case in which the svmptoms that I heard described arose fifom any disease :
when I say tlut, of course I refer not to particular symptoms, but to the general course
which the symptcmis took.

Cross-examined by Mr. Serjeant Shee,

Have you had any experience of idiopathic tetanus ? I believe I remember one case
in our hospital in the physicians* ward, which was shown me as a case of idiopathic
tetanus, but I doubted its deserving the name of tetanus. — I presume it was a very slight
case, then, of tetanic convulsions ? Yes ; I do not remember the particulars. — Considering
how rarely comparatively tetanus is witnessed at all, would you tiiink that the description
of a chambermaid and of a provincial medical man who had only seen one case of tetanus
could be relied upon by you to state what description of disease the disease observed was?
I must say I thought the description very clearly given.

Lord Campbell. — lie is asked, assuming what the witness says is correct.

Mr. Babon Aldebson. — It is not the opinion of the witness, but the facts to which
the witnesses swear.

Mr. Serjeant Shee, — On which of the two would you rely, supposing they differed, the
chambermaid or the medical man ?

Lord Campbell. — ^That is hardly a proper question*

Mr. Babon Aldebson. — It is a proper observation for you to make, brother Shee.

Mr. Serjeant Shee, — I find in Dr. Copland's book the syphilitic poison is sometimes
the cause of convulsions ; is that so in your experience ? I have never seen it produce
convulsions, except as a consequence of disease in the bones of the head.

The Court then adjourned for a short time.

• FOURTH DAT, May 17, 1856. 121

Mr. HENRY DANIEL sworn.— Examined by the Attorney-General
I believe you have now retired from the profession ? I have.— Were yon for many years
sorgeon to the Bristol hospital ? I was. — How many years ? Upwards of twenty-eight. —
How long were you in the profession altogether bejfore you left it? I was in pracriee
nearly thirty years, and I was a student some eight or nine years. — ^Now, in the course of
yoar experience and practice had von occasion to see a good many cases of tetanus ? A
considerable number. — ^What should you say in round numbers ; in the whole about how
many ? If I take it at a vei*y small ratio of one a year, it would be nearly thirty. — You
must have seen near upon some thirty cases ? Yes, I should say certainly that number.
—Were they all from wounds, or any other cases of idiopathic tetanus ? Not all from
wounds ; there were two for certain idiopathic tetanus. — Did those two cases of idiopathic
tetanns terminate fatally ? One did npt, one did. — Do you agree with the other medical
gentlemen that have been called, that idiopathic tetanns is a thing of rare occurrence ?
Very rare ; I quite agree in that. — Now did you find in the cases of idiopathic tetanus
that came .under your observation any difference in the symptoms between them and
tromatb tetanns ? There appeared to be a modified distinction from the symptoms of
tromatie tetanus. — ^Not so severe ? Not so severe.

Lord Campbell. — Did that arise from internal causes rather than external influences ?
Yes, my Lord.

The Attomey'Generah — ^Were you able to trace those two cases of idiopathic tetanmKo
any particular cause ? I was not. — You have heard the other witnesses describe the
coarse in which the symptoms of ordinary tetanus run, do you agree in that from your
experience ? I certainly do. — ^You heard the description given of the symptoms which
accompanied the attack of Mr. Cook before his death ? I did. — Does it appear to you
that the circamstances pf his affection are distinguishable from those cases of tetanus
which came under your extensive experience ? Most assuredly. — Will you point out any
instance in which you found. a marked difference? I should repeat very probably the
words of Sir Benjamin Brodie. — We wish to have your own opinion of the cases that
have come under your own notice ? The tetanus, as far as my impression goes, invariably
begins with uneasiness in the lower jaw, followed by spasms of the muscles of the trunk,
and most frequently extending to the muscles of the limbs. — At what period are the
mnsdes of the limbs affected? Generally towards the end. — Is lock-jaw a common
symptom in these cases of tetanus ? Almost invariably ; tromatic in particular. — ^At
what period does that show itself? The commencement of lock-jaw is one of the earliest
symptoms. — Clenching of the hands, is that one ? I do not recollect that it was a frequent
^rmptom. — You have seen it ? I think I have seen it, but I do not think clenching, a
clenched hand, is an ordinary symptom of common tetanus. — What is it, twisting of the
feet so as to turn it out ? No. — You do not remember that ? I do not remember that as
a symptom.— Of those twenty or thirty cases that have come under your personal ex-
perience what has been the ordinary duration ? I have endeavoured, since the subject
has been mooted, to recollect what was the shortest period, and I cannot recollect any-
thing less than from thirty to forty hours. — ^You cannot recollect a case that took less than
from thirty to forty hours ? No, I cannot. — You must, as surgeon to the Bristol hospital,
have seen a good many cases of syphilitic disease ? I have. — Do you ever know a syphi-
litic sore producing tetanus ? No. — Now in your opinion can the symptoms which you
have heard described in Mr. Cook be referable to apoplexy ? Certainly not.

liord Campbell. — ^Would either the primary or the secondary symptoms of syphilis
produce tetanus ? No. — ^You never knew of such a thing ? Never.

The A.ttomey'OeneraL — You say you think the symptoms cannot be referred to
apoplexy? Certainly not. — Or to epilepsy? No. — Both in the case of epilepsy and
apoplexy is there a loss of consciousness ? There is. — In all the cases of tetanus that
have come under your observation has consciousness been retained to the last? Through-
out all the period. — ^Now in the cases that have come under your experience have the
symptoms ever set in with their full power at the commencement, or have they begun in
a milder form and gone on gradually to a more complete development, ending in death ?
They invariably have been continuous, without any interruption.— So that you never
heard of a case of several hours intervening, when the patient was totally > free from
the disease ? Never. — My question was, whether the symptoms when they did set in in
those cases exhibited their full powers at the commencement, or whether the^ gradually
went on progressing ? They generally commenced very mild and gradually increased in
intensity. — Bearing in mind all your past recollection and experience of the symptoms of
tetanus in ordinary cases, in your judgment could the symptoms of Mr. Cook be referred
to idiopathic or tromatic tetanus? In my judgment they could not.

Lord Campbell. — Can it be referred to any disease ? None.

122 TSUL OF WILLIAM PALMSK.

Qreflfi-exanuiied by Mr. Oraoe,

Do you not read and know from your reading that there are many eases of tromatic
tetanus whece there .is a long interval between the symptoms? I never knew sueh a
thing oecur. — ^I a4k you whether from your reading you do not know that there ate
numerous oaaes mentioned in -which there was a long 'interval of some hours ? I am not
aware of it — Have you>read Pr. Todd's book? I have not. — ^Have you read Mr. Gar-
ling's book ? J .have not : yon must isaollect I have been out of practiee some 17 or 18
months. — ^I am not wishing to press yon cm anything that you do not recollect, but it is
important we should get at your knowledge: you have not read Mr. Curling's book?
I have not. — Have you read i)r. Copland on Convulsions? No, I have not. — Then pro-
bably you have not looked much into the reported cases of tetanus ? Not of late/— Nor
do you recollect your reading un the subject? No, I do not — Can you tell me whether
excitement and irritation from vomiting are not given as the cause of tetanic convulsions?
I am not aware of it* — Can you teU me from your reading or from your experience
whether the aymptoms of tetanic convulsions do not vaiy very much in different caaea,
in some affecting one portion of the body, .and in others another ? ft mey vary : bb £v
as my experience goes almost the leading eymptoms always going .the -same continuons
road. — J ask you, do they not sometimes afiect some muscles of the body .and at other
times others ? I do not think that a pure ordinary tetanus does. — I do not know what
^ou attribute to a pure tetanus ? I am speaking of the ordinary tetanus, tromatic. — You
do not think they do vary? I do not think they do to any ^eat extent ; there may be
an affection of a muscle in this man that there is not iu the other, in a leg or an arm. —
It is supposed to proceed, as we have heard from other witnesses, from the spine ? I
cannot take upon me Jfco say. — ^Can you tell me what the cause of death is in tetanic
affections? It arises from exhaustion not unfrequently. — Does it not frequently arise
from asphyxia ? Well, I do not like the term asphyxia. — Can you supply me with cue ;
suffocation ? Yes, suffocation. — Arising from the absence of ability to respire ? Yes. —
Is that a cause? I think it might be ; I am not positive upon it. — ^Have you seen post-
mortem examinations of persons who have died of tetanus ? Yes, I have ; it is a great
many years ago. — You cannot recollect that? Yes, 1 recollect the general outline. — Can
you tell me this ; whether as to persons dying of suffocation in consequence of impeded
respiration, whether the heart is not found fiJI ? I do not think it is in tetanus. — I ask
you as to death from suffocation? Well, really I cannot tell. — The -tromatic cases of
course we understand are cases proceeding from wounds, and those wounds would form a
very smaill proportion of the cases that are followed by tetanus ? Yes, very small. —
Infinitesimally small ? Yes. — ^Would not that probably be the same if syphilis were the
case ? I really could not say. — Is not that a fair medical conclusion of one class off
wounds ? I really do not understand you. — I will endeavour to make myself understood:
of one class of wounds only an infinitesimally small proportion of the wounds produce
tetanus ; would it not be the same in another class of wounds ? No.— Why not r Because
it has different tissues. — I am asking you as to the proportion ; I am not asking you as
to the effect of the wound on the body ; I should have thought you might have formed a
judgment upon that : I should ask you whether, assuming for a moment that a syphilitic
wound might produce tetanus, would that be only in certain instances ? To tell you the
truth I do not understand your question. — It seems to me my question is not a dlfSicult
one ? It might not be to his Iiordship, but it is a question that is difficult to me. — Can

fou recollect enough of the poct-morten^ to state anything as to the spine or brain?
recollect the post-mortem examination of cases of tetanus sufficiently well to say that
there was not any direct alteration of the normal condition of any -part of the body -that
aecounted for the tetanus affieotion.

Be-examined by the Attomey'General.

I understand you .the examination, however recently after deaths of .the spinal cord and
marrow never, in any .case that you know of, gave any indication or.shonr^ any cause
from which the tetanus could be derived ? Never the slightest.

Mr. SAMUEL SOLLY sworn.— Examinecl by Mr. Wekhy,

I believe you are surgeon at St. Thomas's Hospital ? I am. — For how.iiumy yearahave
you been engaged in hospital practice ? I have been connected with St. Thomas's Hospital
as lecturer and surgeon twenty^eight years. — ^During .that time have you witnessed manj
cases of tetanus ? Yes, I have.— Can you state to the court about how many.? I should
find it difficult to state exactly how nxany ; but I had six or seven under my own care, and
I have seen from ten to fifteen more ; but I do not bear more than that in niind. — I brieve
they have been all cases of tromatic tetanus ? There is one case .in which I woa doubtful
whether it was tromatic or idiopathic ; .the wounds were so slight and the .symptoms so

FOUBrTH WiY, Mat l^, tB6$. 12$

small, that it was fntestionable.— The zest were decidedly tromatic ? Tlie rest'were de*
ddedlj troxaatic— -%llDpo8i^g that to be an idiopathic :tetaiius» did the symptcaas. differ in
their progress from the other cases of tromatic tetanus ? They were slower in .their
progress and generally rather milder. — Would you inform us of the shortest period l^t
an^ of the cases of tetanus you have witnessed occupied before the disease, arrived .at 9
point ? I can remember none under thirty hours. — ^In those cases did the symptoms sot
ffi frequently at first, or did they gradually increase in intensity ? .Always progressing^
Now you have heard the description given by the witness of Mr. Cook's attacks on t^
Monday and the Tuesday ? I have. — Does that account differ from what took place in
the cases of ^tetanus to which you have referred ? It differs essentially. — ^Will you state
m what respect? In all the eases of tetanus that I have seen there has been a marked
exprenion of the countenance, that is the first symptom ; it is a sort of grin ; it is so
peeoliar, thst having onoe seen it you can never mistake it. — >In what other respects.do the
esKS differ? More j^articnlarly in this fhct, that 'mihe symptoms which I have heard
detailed there were violent convulsions on the Monday, but I -believe on the Tuesday the
indiTidnal was entirely free from any discomfort about the face or jaw. — In the cases that
hare oouMe under your notice, have the symptoms been continuous ? Always continuous;
and that expression of the countenance and the more or less fixedness of tiie jaw is the
last tyuck-piam that does appear.— ^In ordinary 'tetanus, which portion of the body is first
vStebtd by tthe spasm, the trunk or the Umbs? The muscles of the face first, then the
mnscles of the jaw, then the trunk, and then the limbs. — In your judgment w«re the
symptoms described in Mr. Cook's case referable to apoplexy or epil^sy ? — No. — Or to
any other disease ? No ; to neither apoplexy nor epilepsy, nor any disease that I have ever
witnessed. *'

Cross-examined by Mr. Serjeant Shee,

Ton say that in ^1 the cases that you have seen there was a marked expresshm of the
countenance, a sort of grin ; is there a Latin term for that, which is known? Yes^
risus ^ardonicus, — Is not that very common in all forms of violent convulsions ? No, it is
not common. — Does it not frequently occur in all violent convulsions which assume^
without being tetanus, a tetanic form and appearance ? Yes, it does.— :Are they .not 9,
very numerous class ? No, they are not numerous. — Is it not very difficult to distii^guish
between them and idiopathic tetanus ? In the onset, but not in the pvogress.— J think
you say you have only seen one case of idiopathic tetanus ? I have only seen one.

Lord Caju PBELL. — ^And that was a doubtful one.

Mr. Serjeant Shee. — ^When you answered that question of mine you spoke from yonr
leading and not from your experience ? I did not know your question applied to idiopathic
tetanus alone. — ^Does .epilepsy sometimes occur in the midst of violent ^convulsions ? Epi-
lepsy itself is a disease of a convulsive character. — I am. aware of that ; but you heard me
account that was given by Mr.. Jones of the few last moments before Mr. Cook died? Yesj
I did. — ^That he uttered a piercing shriek, fell back and died ; did he not ? Yes.

The Attorney-General, — I beg your pardon ; there was an interval.

Mr. Serjeant Sh$e, — ^No, no ; five or six minutes.

Xiord Campbell.— tHe died very quietly.

The Witness, — ^I heard the description of the shriek, with the convulsion ; but it was
the shriek that called the medical man into the room.

Mr. Serjeant >S^e.— That was at the height of the attack? Yes.— Tell me whether
that last shriek and the paroxysm that occurred immediately afterwards, would not that
bear a strong resemblance to epilepsy ? In some respects it bears a resemblance to it. —
Are all epileptic convulsions — I do not mean epileptic convulsions designated by scientific
men as of the ejnleptic character — are they all attended with an utter want of conscious-
ness ? No, not all. — Does not death by convulsions frequently occur without leaving any
tHMse in-the body behind it ? Death from tetanus, accompanied with convulsions, leaves
fleldimi any treoe <b^md ; butdeath from epilepsy leaves a -trace behind it 'generally-.—^
What trace ? fiome few effusions of blood on the brain, or congestion of the vessels-.-—
Does it 1^ frequently happen that convulsions that have not assumed the peculiar -features
of epilepsy destroy life and leave no trace in the body ? I am not aware ; it has not come
within my own cogniaance.

Lord CAMFBBLL.~t-Have you known it in infants ? I'have seen comparatively little of
the disease in infants.

Re-examined by the Attorney-General,

Are the convulsions that take place in epilepsy of a tetanic charaoter ? Not at ally
and I have seen a great deal of the convulsions of epilepsy. — Are they ever acconxpanied
by clenching of the hands that we have heard described, or the .distortion of the feet and

124 TRIAL OF WILLIAM PALMER.

toes ? The conTnlsioiis from epilepsy are accompanied with everything.— ^Permanent ?
Not permanent. — ^Why do you say that in the case of Mr. Cook, according to the
symptoms you have heard described, he did not die from epilepsy ; why do you say
so? There were none of the symptoms of epilepsy ; when the patient dies with epilepsy
he dies perfectly unconscious, his consciousness is entirely gone. — But my friend .asked
you just now whether ihere were not some cases of epilepsy in which consciousness was
not entirely gone ? Some cases of convulsive disease similar to epilepsy.

Mr. Serjeant SKee, — Of the epileptic character.

The Attorney 'General, — ^Are you able to say this was not such a case ? I have never
seen any case of convulsive disease at all like this. — My learned friend asked you whether
there were not forms of convulsions that were similar to tetanic convulsions, and you said
there were some that were so in the onset, but not in the progress ; will you point . out
Vherein the distinction rests as regards the progress of the disease between the two
sorts ; my friend put to you a question as to whether there were not some forms of
convulsions ? Yes ; the ulceration of the brain from injury will produce convulsions
which will terminate in death ; a sudden injury to the spinal oord will prodace convul-
sions which will terminate in death; irritation of the teeth in infants will produce
convulsions. — ^Are those convulsions in their onset similar to the oonvulsioiis of tetcmus?
No, they are not ; and there is no progressive movement, there is no appearance about tiie
faoe or jaw of having tetanus ; I have never missed that.

Mr. HENRY LEE sworn.— Examined by Mr. Bodkin,

You are surgeon to the Lock Hospital ? I am surgeon to King's College and the
Lock Hospital. — How long have you been professionsdly acquainted with the Lock
Hospital? Some eighteen years. — Is that an establishment particularly devoted to
syphilis'? It is. — ^Exclusively? Exclusively. — Could you in round numbers mentioa
about the number of syphilis cases that have come under your notice during your
eighteen years? At present I suppose it is not less than 3000 cases a-year at King's
College and at the Lock Hospital. — In many of those cases have you seen syphilitic
affections of the throat ? I have seen a considerable number. — And also that phase of
the disease called chancre ? Yes. — Have you ever known an instance in which either of
those forms of disease have terminated in tetanus ? No, never. — Have you had . any
experience ypnrself in cases of tetanus ? Not much.

Lord Campbell. — ^Will either primary or secondary symptoms of syphilis produce
tetanus ? I have never seen nor have I read of a case ; I have heard of one.

Dr. ROBERT CORBETT sworn.— Examined by Mr. Jmnes,

Are you now^a physician practising at Barhead, near Glasgow ? I am. — In September,
1846, were you medical clerk to the Glasgow Royal Infirmaiy? I was. — Do you
remember a patient being in the hospital of the name of Agnes French ? I remember
one. with a name like that ; I think she was called Senet. — Is that the same person ? It
is the same person.— What name did she pass by in the hospital ? Agnes Sennet—^-Did
she die on the 2ijth of September, 1845? She did. — Now was it ascertained that her
death was occasioned by strychnia pills ? The patients in the ward said that sh€| had
taken the strychnia pills, and she died with symptoms of poisoning from strychiua,-^^
Now did you see her shortly before her death ? I saw her at the time she was under, the
symptoms. — Under the influence of poison ? I had seen her during the day before that
perfectly well.

Lord CAMPBELL.-'For what was she a patient in the hospital? She had .been takeai
in for a disease in the head. — ^And was she perfectly well? Yes; on that, day, the day-
she died.

Mr. Jcmies, — She had taken some strychnia pills that had been placed there ibrasoCfaer
paralytica! patient? Yes. — ^Were you called to her when she was vsder the influenee of
poison? I was. — ^Where did you find her; was she in bed or in the ward? She mis
m bed when I saw her. — ^Will you describe her symptoms when you saw her snfiering fpom
or under the influence of this poison ? There was a retraction of the month and face, touch
suffused and red, the pupils dilated^ the head was bent back, the spine-curved, and the pupils
rigid and hard like a board.--How were her arms ? Her arnks were stret^ed^out and
her hands clenched, severe paroxysms recurring every few seconds at sh6rt intervids.^ —
How long was it before she died ? She died in about an hour and a quarter after taking
the medicine ; after taking the pills. — ^They were pills, as you have said ? Yes. — ^How-
long did the paroxysms last from the time you were called to her until death ? I think
when I was called to her they did not last so long ; they increased in severity. — From the
time you were called to her until her death, what time elapsed ? The paroxysms lasted

FOURTH DAY, May 17, 1866. 125

nearly an hour.' — Do you know whait quantity there was of the strychnia that she took ;
I think you have the prescription that was made up for the paralytic patient? l^ere
should be a quarter of a grain in each pill. — ^Was it ascertained how many pills she
took? Yes, three pills. — Were those pills for the paralytic patient to take on each
mghi? Each night, or night and morning. — And this girl^ as you say, took three of
them ? Yes.

Cross-examined by Mr. Serjeant Shee.

You say there was a retraction of the mouth ? The angles of the mouth. — ^Was that
continuous ? It was continuous, but it was worse at times. — Did it continue after death ?
I do not think I observed it after death. — ^Did the clenching of the hands continue after
death? In my report I think I said the hands were semi-bent. — ^Did the clenching
continue after death ? No, they were not clenched.

Lord Campbell. — ^How were they ? Something in this form. (^The witness described

iheform.)

The Attorney-General, — Partially clenched ?

Lord Campbell. — ^They were not clenched, but semi-bent? That was a few hours
after death.

Mr. Serjeant Shee, — Is not that semi-bending of the hand a very common thing in
eases of death by violent convulsions ? I think it is. — You say she died in an hour and
a quarter after taking the medicine ? Yes. — How long after taking the medicine was she
attacked by the symptoms? Twenty minutes. — Did you try to make her vomit with a
feather ? Yes. — Did you fail ? She vomited partially, she did not vomit much. — ^Was
that after giving her an emetic ? It was after giving her an emetic, and after tickling
the fauces with a feather.

Re-examined by the AUomey-Oeneral,

There was no spasmodic action ? There was a g^nding of the teeth. The spasmodic
action followed. Shecould not open her mouth to swallow anything.-— There was not
what is called lock-jaw in ordinary tetanus ? No.

Mr. Serjeant Shee, — I have omitted to ask one question ; perhaps your Lordship will
have the goodness to put it ?

Lord Campbell. — ^Ask it yourself.

Mr. Serjeant SJiee, — ^Was she not in such a condition after she had taken the poison,
that the mere touching of her sent her off into a paroxysm ? I do not recollect.

Dr. WATSON sworn. — ^Examined by the Attorney- General,

You are one of the physicians, I believe, of the Glasgow Infirmary ? I am surgeon. —
Do you remember the case of which the last witness has been speaking ? Perfectly well. —
The case of Agnes Senet ? Yes, I do. — ^Were you called in to attend her? Yes. — ^How
soon after she was taken, do you know ; aner the symptoms first began ? It must
have been about a quarter of an hour, I should think.

Lord Campbell. — After she was taken ill ? After she was taken ill.

The Attorney-General. — What state did you find her in ? Violent convulsions. —
In what state were her arms ? Stretched out and rigid. — In what condition were
the muscles of the body ? They were also rigid.— Were they convulsed ? The;^ were
kept quiet by rigidity.— When you saw them they had become rigid ? Yes. — Did you
observe anything about her feet and legs ? They were also rigid. — ^What was the state
of her breathing ? Just at that moment she did not breathe ; the muscles were kept quite
quiet by the tetanic rigidity of the whole frame just for that second ; it was not carried
on at all ; it was during the excess of the time. — ^Did that paroxysm subside at all ?
Yes, it subsided almost immediately. — ^Was it renewed afterwards? Yes. — ^And fresh
paroxysms came on ? Yes. — After what interval ? After a very short interval ; I cannot
exactly say how long. — How long was she dying ? About half an hour. — ^Did those
paroxysms occur at. intervals until it destroyed her? Yes. — ^What was the state of her
consciousniess during the time? She seemed perfectly conscious.— Did you observe
anything about her hands ? I do not recollect the state of her hands. — ^Did you observe
them after death ? No ; I cannot recollect the state of them. — I do not know whether her
body was opened afterwards ? Yes, her body was opened. — ^What did you find the con-
dition of the heart ? It was stiff; the walls were stiff and the cavities empty.— I think
you published an account of it ? , My father did. — ^You do not remember the state of the
fingers and thumbs ? I' do not.

Cross-examined by Mr. Grove,
In the post-mortem examination what part of the body did you open first ? I cannot
answer that ; I did not make the inspection myself. — ^Was the head opened when you saw

126 TBSM. OF WILLIAM PALMEB.

bar? Tile huA mm opened^ — I mtfpimB if'the UaA wbs opened ffa«t the blood wonlfl
flow ont, a great deal of blood? It miglit. — ^Wonld tbat tend to empty the heart? It
might do fo.

Be<ezaiiii]ied by the Attorngy'Oat£raL

Were joa present at tbe*pof(*mortem eiamination ? I was. — ^What was the cooditicxi
of the spinal cord ? Nothing pardcnhir. — With r^;ard to health ? Quite healthy .—Toa
saw nothing to indicate an abnormal condition there ? Nothing.

hord Campbbll. — ^Was the heart contracted ? Yes.

Dr. JAMES PATTERSON sworn.— Examined by Mr. Wetifry,

In the year 1845 were yon an a^pprealioe in the h^ratory of the- Infirmary at
Glasgow ? I was. — Was it yonr business to dispense the prescriptions ? It was.—
Now do you remember dispensing a prescription in the month of December in that
year for a paralytic patient of the name of M'lntyre? I remember snch a prescription
was dispensed. — ^Was it in the form of pills? It wasw — ^Did they contain, strychmne?
They did.

Lord Campbell. — What was the yehicle to conTcy it ? They were made up of floor
and symp,

Mr. Wehhy. — ^What quantity of strychnine? The prescription was four pills, one
g|!mn and a quarter of a grmn in each pill.

CnMMhezamined by Mr. Serjeant Shee,

Is this flour and syrup the usual thing in which medicine of this kind is made up ?
It is always the -mode in which I have prepared them when in the laboratory.

Mr, Baron Aldebson. — Was there any noise about their being taken by another
person ? There was.

MARY KELLY sworn*— Eiamined by Mr. Bodkm.

Were you, in September, 1846, in the infirmary at Glasgow? Yes. — ^What were yoa
doing there, as a nurse or a patient ? A patient. — Was there a paralylic patient in the
Sfone ward that you had to attend to ? Yes. — Was there also a padent who went l^ the
name of French ? - Yes. — Or Senet, who died shortly after you were there ? Yefc— Was
she suffering from a sore head ? Yes. — In the course of the afternoon on. whioh Senet
died were you doing something with the wheel to the paralytic patient ? I was tuning
it. — It was to be applied to the skin for some purpose? Yes. — ^While you were doing that
did the girl who had the sore head come up and ask you some questions about her ? She
came uprand asked me what P was doin^.---She asked you some questions about what yoa
were doing ? Yes^ — ^Were liiere some-piUs there which the paralytic patient was to take ;
was there a boK with some pills < in it ? Yes* — ^While the girl with the sore head wasthere
did vou see the paralytic patient, take one of those pills ? Yes.— -Out of the box, and
swallow it ? Yes. — ^Was that according to the order that had been given ? Yes. — ^That she
was to take one pill at a time ? Yes.r«-Aiter she had done that she handed thebox with the
other pills in it to the girl with the sore head ? Yes, to French,^-Did you/ see the gijl
with the sore head take any of those pills ? Yes* two. — She swallowed them ? Yes. — ^Did
she swallow only two, or did she ti^e any more ? No ; I only saw her take two.^ — l^i^
she go and sit near the fire where there were some other patients sitting ? She came and
sat down by the ward fire. — ^Was she soon after that taken ill ? Yes; — ^About how long
after she had taken the pills ? About an hour and a half altogether from the time she had
taken them.

Lord CAMPBELL.T— How soon after she had taken the piils was she taken ill? I think
about three quarters of an hour. — In what way did she appear to be taken ill ; what did yon
observe ? She f^U back on the floor, and I went for a nurse. — Did you then lift her into
bed ? Yes. — You and the nurse ? Yes. — ^And a medical man, the doctor, was sent for ?
Yes. — Did you notice her after she was put upon the bed ? Yes ; I went into the next bed
to her. — ^You remained up some time after this ? Yes. — ^Did you notice anything remark-
able about her after she was put upon the bed ? The nurse cut her olothes off; she never
moved after she was put upon the bed ; she was just like a poker. — ^Did you notice her
hands ? No, I did not. — Or her feet ? No. — ^Were ^ou with her when she died ? I was
just aside of her. — Were you up, or in bed ? Standing on the floor. — ^Did she say any-
thing ? No, she never spoke after she fell.

Gross-examined by Mr. Serjeant EB^e*'

Just attend to me j you are under a mistake about the time ; how long- was it after Ae

took the pills that the symptoma of illness came upon her ? Well, I cannot rightly J^U ;

it is so long back ; from, the time that she was carried to the bed was three quartets of im

hour. — How long was it ftovx the time that she took the piUs to the time that she apijeared

FOITBTH DAY, May 17, 18fi6. 127

ill ? About three quarters of an- hour. — Ton «af the nune was obliged to cut her clothes
oS? Yea

CAROLINE HICK90N swoni.--Bxaimiied by Mr. James.

Were you, in October, 1848, nurse in the family of Mrs. Serjeantson Smith ? I was.-—
Who now Uve at Sherbom, near Basingstoke ? Yes. — Were you nurse there, or lady's-
maid? Nurse and lady's-maid. — ^Were the family at that time residing near Romsey?
They were. — How far from Romsey ? About two miles. — In Hampshire ? In Hampshire. —
On the dOth of October in that year, 1848, was MVs, Serjeantson Smith unwell ? She was
sofferiDg from weakness^ — ^Was there a Mr. Jones, a dmg^at, in Romtey, with whom you
dealt for drugs ? There was. — Had a prescription been sent to Mr. Jones to make up fbc
Mrs. Smith } Yes. — ^Do you remember the medicine l)eing brought back from Mr. Jones ?
Yes.— About wliat time in the day was it ? In the afternoon, about 6 o'clock. — ^In what
&rm of medicine waa it ? A mixture.

Lord Cakpbsix. — A mixture in a bottle ? Yes.

Ur. James, — ^Did you see your mistress take it ? I did. — How much did she take ?
Aboit half a wine-giass. — As nearly as you can recollect, about what time was it ; in
the norniDg or in the evening ? In the morning. — On the following morning ? On the
foUowbg morning. — ^Abont what time in the morning- was it that she took it^ as near as
70a can remember? About 5 or 10 minutes past 7. — It was in her bed»>room? It was
in her bed-room. — ^Now, having given her that medicine, you left the room probably ?
I did.—How soon afterwards were you alarmed by the ringing of the bell ? About 5
minutes, or it might be 10. — When you went into your mistress's room in what state did
yon find her ; what first attracted your attention? I thought she had fainted ; she was
leaning upon a chair. — Was she up or in bed ? From the bed. — ^In her night-dress ?
hi her nignt-dress. — ^What did you find ; just describe it ? She appeared to suffer from
what I thought spasms. — You ran down and sent the coachman mto Mr. Taylor's the
surgeon ? I did. — You then returned to your mistress's room ? Yes. — Now when you
fstorned did you find some of the other servants in your mistress's room ? I did. — ^Assist-
ing to- support her? Upon the floor. — She was lying upon the floor? Yes. — What did
7<)u notice that ^e was doing ? She screamed very much. — Loudly T Loudly, but did
not open her teeth. — ^Did'she say anything to you about her arms or legs? She asked
nie to have them puUed straight. — Did yon take hold of her arms or legs^? Yes. — In
^at state did you find them ? Drawn up very much. — What did she say then to you ;
what did you do ? She still sereamed as if in* great agony. — Did you throw some water
over her; did she request some water to be thrown over her? Yes.

Lord Campbell. — ^Did she request it? Yes. — And you did so? Yes.

_Mr. James. — You say her arms and legs were drawn up very much ? Yes. — ^Did you
notice her feet ? They were turned inwards. — Did you put hot water to her feet ? I
did.— A bottle of hot water ? A bottle of hot water. — Had that any effect in relaxing the
feet ? None at all. — Shortly before she died did she make any request of you to do
something with her ? She said she felt easier a short time before she died. — Before she
died, the last words she uttered, did she say anything to you ? " Turn me over." —
^id you turn her over ? Yes, I did. — She was lying on the floor ? She was lying on the
floor.--.And how shortly after she said to you ** turn me over," did she die ? In a very
^ minutes. — Did* she die tranquilly after you turned her over ? Very quietly. — You say
itwas very shortly before she died that she said ** turn me over ?" Yes. — Was she conscious,
did she know you during the whole time ? Quite well.— -She addressed you, and knew
70Q? Yes) quite well.— -Now fW>m the time that you gave her by mistake, the surgeon
sent It by mistake, this medicine that morning, what was about the time until she died ? I
think about an hour and a quarter. — I think you said it was about from 5 to 10 minutes
J^ you had given her the medicine before the bell rang? About that time. — ^About
how much of the medicine did she take in the glass ? About half a wineglassfbl. n

Cross-examined by Mr. Qrove,

The 5 or 10 minutes that you speak of, was that after taking the medicine? Yes,
^^ taking the medicine. — From the time you saw her in the spasms when you were
^led up, could she after that at all sit up ? No, not all.— When you endeavoured to
^''^ighten her limbs, I presume it was when she was in the paroxysms, the stiff rigid
P'u^oxysms? Yes.— What was the effect of the cold water? She did not seem to take
^y notice of it. — Was she then in the paroxysms? Yes.— How long fits had she alto-
gther? She only seemed easy for a very short time before her death. — Was it a con-
"nvial recurring fit? Continuons.— It lasted about an hour ? About an hour or an hour
^u a quarter,— Were her teeth clenched during the whole time ? Quite close.

128 TRIAL OF WILLUM PALMER.

Be-examioed by the Attomty^QeneraU

You say it lasted an hour and a quarter ; do I understand you to say the fit lasted an
hour and a quarter ? From the time I gave her the medieine until she died. — Hov soon
after you gave her the medicine did &e fit ^me on? Lwent in in about five or ten
minutes after that. — Was she all the whole of the time from the fit coming on stiff? She
tras only relieved for a very short time. — How long before her death ? A very few mi-
nutes. — ^Was she conscious all the while? Quite conscious.

Mr. FRANCIS TAYLOR sworn.— Examined by Mr. Wel^,

I b^ere you are a surgeon and apothecary at Romsey ? I am. — ^Were you so in the
year 1^48? I wa&— l>id yon attend Mrs. Serjeantson Smith? I did. — Do you re-
member being summoned to her house one morning, and on going there you found
her dead ? Yes, I do. — ^About what time in the morning did you get there ? Soon after,
between eight and nine o'clock. — I believe the body was lying on the floor by the bed-
side ? The body was lying on the floor between the bed and some piece of furniture in
the comer. — Did you observe in what state the limbs were ? They were pointed out by
Caroline Hickson. — ^Did you observe them ? The hands were very much contracted.

Lord CiMPBELL. — ^The hands were clenched ? Yes, my Lord.

Mr. Weltby, — And the legs ? The feet were contracted, turned inwards ; the soles of
the feet were hollowed up.

Lord Campbell. — The sole and the heel were curved ? The toes were contracted and
the sole hollowed up.

Mr. Welsby, — Unnaturally so? Quite so; remarkably. — ^Did that appear to have
been from recent spasmodic action ? Yes, I should suppose so ; and the inner edge of
each foot was turned up ; the foot was twisted. — Did you observe whether there was any
extraordinary rigidity about the limbs ? They were remarkably stiff.

Lord Campbell. — ^Was the body still warm ? It was still warm-
Mr. Wehby. — ^And the limbs were remarkably stiff? They were. — ^Did you observe
the eyelids I Yes ; the eyelids were totally adherent almost to the eyeballs. — I believe
the druggist who made up the prescriptions for the family was a person of the name of
Jones? He was.~Did you see him shortly afterwards running up to the house in a
state of great excitement ? I did. — Did you subsequently make a post-mortem exami-
nation ? I did. — Had you ordered any prescription for this lady on the day before ? No,
I had not seen her for some time. — How long after death did you make the post-mortem
examination ? I think it was three days after. At that time did the contraction of the
feet continue ? The contraction did continue of the feet, but it was gone off somewhat
from the rest of the body. — Did you make a post-mortem examination ? Yes ; that was
somewhat the position of the hands three days after death (describing).
Lord Campbell. — Semi-bent ? Yes.

Mr. Wey)y. — Did you find any trace of disease in the body ? Not any. — In what
condition did you find the heart ? Contracted, and perfectly empty : I wish to say also
that all the large arteries leading to the heart were quite empty, and the blood was fluid.
— Bid you subsequently analyse the medicine of which she had taken a i>art? I did,
with Mr. Randall of Southampton. — ^What did you find it contained ? A large quantity
of strychnia undissolved. — You say a large quantity ; can you say how much ? I know
it originally contained nine grains, of which Mrs. Smith had taken one-third, so that
there were six grains left in the bottle. — Did you take out the stomach and bowels ?
Yes. — Did you make an examination of them to ascertain whether you could find any
poison ? A very general one, the truth was so apparent of her having taken poison in
an easier manner.

The Attorney- General. — ^Did you find any ? Yes, as far as it went; the examination
was not satisfactory, sufficient for me to swear to : I have no doubt from the rough test
that we tried ; we did not attend to that, because we had plenty of proof without it.

Cross-examined by Mr. Serjeant Shee,

Does it not constantly happen ' in the cases of death by ordinary convulsions that the
body in various parts of it is verj much distorted ? I am noV aware that it shows after
death.— Does not the body remain in ordinary cases of death in the position in which the
deceased was at the time of death ? As a general rule, I should say not ; I should think not
after death. — I think we have learnt in the course of this inquiry that it is usual to lay
out a body very soon after death, immediately after death ; supposing that not to be
done, does not the body stiffen ; does not the rigor mortis set in, and continue the corpse in
the attitude in which the man dies ? Yes, one or two limbs would remain ; if an arm
was left across the chest it would stiffen so. — If the hand were clenched when lie man

FOURTH DAY, Mat 17, 1856. 129

died, it would continae so? I do not know of my own knowledge sufficiently as to those
£icts.— It may well be that oorpses are so constantly laid out regularly, tliat in your ex-
perience it may just have happcBed? Tkere was a difficulty in laying out this body ; the
ankles were tied with Boak» biandafe, soaie handkerchief, to keep lliem together.

Lord Cajcfbbll. — That yon obterved ? Yes ; I forget what the bandage was ; the
toes wished to tarn inwards, and they had to fasten them. I am speaking now from a
leeolleetion of eight years. — ^The handkerchief was employed for what purpose ? To bind
the ankles together.

Mr. Serjeant Sfiee, — ^Yoa opened the body ; where did you commence in opening the
1)ody? The thorax and abdomen. — Did you then open the head?'. Not until after we
had finished the examination of the trunk. — Did you take out the intestines ? Part of the
intestines ; the upper intestines.

Re-examined by the Attomey-GeneraL
I Hlo not know wlietlier you examined the spinal cord.— No.

CHARLES BBOXAM sworn.— Examined by Mr. ffaddlesion.
Were you apprentice to Mr. Jones in 1848? I was. — ^A chemist at Bomsey? He
vas.-I believe you were his only apprentice ? Yes. — He has since died ? Yes. — ^Do
yw remember a prescription coming to be made up for Mrs. Serjeantson Smith ? I
do.—I believe it was a mixture of salicine, orange-peel, and water ? It was. — ^Where
»>s the salicine kept ? On a high shelf. — In a small bottle ? In a small bottle. —
Upon the same shelf was there a bottle of strychnia? Yes. — And there was a mistake
njade, I believe, in the strychnia for the salicine ? There was.

Lord Cakp^ell. — ^The error was by mistaking the two medicines ? Yes.

The Attorney 'OefieraL — It is right to a«k you, it was not dome by you ; I "will ask
you that for your own sake ; it was not your mistake, but your poor master's ? Yes. —
And he destroyed himself afterwards ? Yes.

JANE WITHAM* sworn.— Examined by Mr. James.

In March last were you in attendance on a lady who died ? Yes. -

Lord CAMJfvxLL. — You need not mention the lady's name.

Mr. Jame$, — ^Do you remember her taking some medicine ? Yes. — Do you remember
after her taking that medicine she became ill? Yes. — ^Whei^ she was first ^en ill,
■»fhat did she complain of to you ? Of her back. — What did she complain of in her
Wick? She said ** Will you come to my back?" — Did you attend upon her, and go to her
back? Yes, I did. — What did you observe? Her head was thrown back, and I could
not get at her back.— Was she in bed ? Yes. — Did you observe any twitching ? Yes,
she had twitchings of the ankles. — ^What did you observe about her ? Her eyes were
drawn aside and staring, and when I put my hand in front of her she jumped up ;
they did not at all relax their rigidity. — Do not mention the name ; but in your presence
^4 $h^ rec^uest her husband to rub her ?

Mr. Serjeant Shee, — I must beg my friend not to ask these questions.

Mr. JameB^ — Did she make any request to her husband about her legs ? No. — Or
her arms? • No; not at that time. — When was it that you first observed, or when did
sbe first complain of being ill in this way? On the 25th of February. — When did she
^ie? On the 1st of March. — Now, after these attacks of which she complained, did she
get better before they came on again ? Yes. — Had she several attacks ? I saw them ;
on&onMoiAiy, Wednesday, Thui"sday, a slight one on Friday, and one on Saturday.
Did.she die on the Saturday ? She diea on the Saturday. — When was the first attack ?
Oq Monday the 25th, the second on Wednesday the 27th, the third on Thursday the
28th.*-.The fourth ? And on Friday a very slight one. — ^And died Saturday ; about what
time was it? It commenced about a quarter past 8, and she died at 20 minutes to 11.
At night? Yes.— Now, between these attacks, was she at times better? Yes. — ^And
composed? Yes ; she was up on the Saturday afternoon. — Without asking you what she
complained of at any one of these attacks, can vou tell us what she complained of
genmdljr' iH those attacks ? Principally a pricking in her legs, and twitching of the
mnscles in the hands, and she compared them to a galvanic shock ; she said she could
compare tliem to nothing else. — Now, during any ot these attacks, did you hear her
request her husband to do anything to her legs and arms ? Yes, she wished them to be
rubbed. — She died on Saturday ; did she die ^n one of those attacks ? Yes. — How
shortly before her death did Dr. Morley come ? She was dead when he came.

Cross-examined by Mr. Serjeant Shee*

You have told my learned friend she requested her husband to rub her arms and legs ?

I

130 yjRIAL OF WILLIAM PALMER.

Yes. — Whs that- at the comm^xioenient o£ the p aroxyons, and -bcfom. ihey bad become
strong ? Yes ; on the Saturday mght 6h«,<iould not heAr»h«r leg» touched .-«*Waa that the
case at all times when the spagms were stpopg v^pen lier ? Do* y<w misait upon the -Setnr-
day ? — At any time when, the spasms wene stroxig HpOA her? Yes, upon the Sfletarday.—
Were the s^sms stronger upon her on the Saturday than on the other-, days ? Much
stronger. — what day was it she asked to be rubbed ? £yer3^ day exc^ on Satotday.^
Now, she asked to be rubbed: we^e her limbs extended.? Yes. — ^Rigidly 3 Yes.— Oh the
Saturday, during the intervals between the spasms, did she ask to be rubbed ?^ Ko* ^e
did not speak but once or twice during the Saturday. — ^DuriQg th« intervals pf.the spasms
on the Saturday, did touching her bring the spasms on ? Yes. — Could she swallow ,4nring
the spasms ? Not 6n the Saturday ; she had a draught given her during the week-T-Bnt
not on the Saturday ? No j her mouth was quite closed. — After death, was her bo3y stiff?
Yes : I did not stay long in the house after her death ; I left it immediately. — Do you
mean within a few minutes ? Yes, 10 minutes. — ^Did she appear to be sensible ^a the
Saturday ? From about half an hour to an hour I think she was insensible.— What time
of the day was that? From a quarter past 8 till after 9.— 7H0W long was she insensible?
The remainder of that time she did not speak. — ^You say she did not speak: have jou
any reason to think that she was conscious ? Her eyes were so fixed we could not tell
whether she was sensible or not.

He-examined by Mr. James,

On the Saturday beft>re she died were the spasms more violent than the other fits
which she had had ? A greait deal. — ^Were they of the same kind, though more violent ?
X es.

Mr. GEORGE MORLEY sworn.— Examined by Mr. Wdshy.

I believe you are a surgeon ? 1 am.— Were you the medical attendant upon the lady
to whom the last witness alluded ? I was. — Had you been attending her for some time
before her death for a functional derangement? For about two months. — Now, do yon
remember seeing her on the Monday before her death ? I do. — Did you then observe any
peculiarity about the body ? She was lying in bed apparently comfortable : whilst by her
bedside I observed several convulsive twitchings of her arms.

Lord Campbell. — You were standing by her bedside ? I was standing by her bed-
side^

Mr. Welsh/, — ^Were they slight or strong? They were slight; sLe had recovered
ft'om a more severe atteusk.

Lord Campbell. — She told you so ? She told me so.

Mr. Welsby. — I believe you referred them at that time in your own mind to hysteria?
Yes. — And you altered your medicine in consequence ? I did. — Did the same symptoms
continue upon other days in that week ? I saw them once again during the week.— On
which day ; do you remember ? I think on Thursday : I am not sure whether Wednes-
day or Thursday. — ^Do you remember seeing her on the morning of Saturday, the day on
which she died ? I saw her on Saturday. — ^About what hour was that ? The middle of
the day : I am not sure of the hour. — She was apparently better then, was she not? Much
better.-^In a composed state ? Quite in a composed state. — Did she complain to you of an
attack that she had had in the night? She did. — What description did she give you of
it ? She spoke of pain and spasms, affections of the back and neck. — ^^Vhat kind of affec-
tion ? Spasmodic : we may use th6 term shoc/i in describing it. — Is that the whole of
what she told you about it ? In substance. — Now, wdre you sent for on the Saturday
night hastily? I was. — ^I believe another medical gentleman went with you? Dr.
Hobson. — I believe when you got there you w-ere met with the announcement that she
was dead ? Yes. — ^Did you go into the room where the dead body was ? We did.— Did
you look at it ? We looked generally, but made no particular examination. — Did you on
the Monday, in company with another medical gentleman, woke a post-mortem examina-
tion ? Yes.— First let mfe ask you, did you find in any part of the body any disease
which could account for death ? None whatever, — Were there any emissions ? No.— Or
any wound or sore? No wound or sore except the plAce where a mustard poultice had

been placed. — Did you observe any particular expression about the countenance ? ^

Eeculiar expression of anxiety, — Did you ^observe anything extraordinary about the
ands ? The hands were semi-bent, tlie fingers curved. — And about the feet ? The feet

were strongly arched. — Did you make a careful examination of the stomach and its con-
tents for the purpose of detecting, if vdu 6ouid, the presence of poison ? Yes, we ^^^C'
I believe you applied several colour-tests, as they are called ? Yes.— Will you describe
them shortly? I may generally say nitric acid, followed by proto-chlwride of tin ; sul-
phuric acid, followed by diloride of potash in the liquid and also in the solid state.—Are

.FOURTH DAY, May' 17, 1856. 131

Ifaofie the proper chemical' tests to l» applied to detect tlfe presence of strycYnaaJT I belieye
those are the best: tbey are not the whole; but those ore the best. — ^Did they in each case
produce the proper precipitate ? We produced the appearance -characteristic of strychnia.
—On each occasion? On each occasion. — Did you afterwards make experiments by
administering some of the contents of the stomach to animals 9 Yes^ we did, more by
inocnlation than by adnuni&tering. — What animals did you use? Two mice, two
zabbits, and one guiiiea-pig : we inoculated with the stuff taken from the stomach : I
^ould say that was after the separation of the strychnine by chemical ansdysis.

Lord Caispbxll. — ^Without any addition ? Except the materials used in the analysis.

Mr. Welsby. — ^What resultdid you observe ? We observed in each of the animals more
er less of the effects ususdly produced by the poison strychnia ? Will you describe them ?
General uneasiness, difficult breathing, cogavuisions of the tetanic kind, muscular rigidity,
Raohin£ backwards, especially of th« head and neck, a violent stretching of the legi^: that
followedrin four of the animals: in one in two minutes. — Which was that? The rabbit,
another in five minutes, and in the fourth in a Uttle less than an hour, fifty-five minutesi
—In the fourth ; you have only described three at psesent ? The^inea-pig suffered but
slightly at first, and that animal, having been left, was found deaid afterwards the next
day; the fifth animal, a rabbit, exhibited very strongly marked symptoins of sti7chnia
pfiMon ; it lay apparently dead for a while, but it recovered entirely*— And did you
oi)serve in the cas&of any of those animals whether the muscular rigidity continued after
4eath?— Ji continued after death without any intermdsaioa:. there wasan in^tervalofrelaxa^
tioD, hut immediately after death the muscles became* viery rigid. — You mean move so
than at the rigor tnortis ? Yes. — Now did you afterwards make a similar series of experi*
laents on some animals with strychnia itself? We did« a great i many .-^In a solid or in
a liquid form? In both forms. — ^And were the symptoms and the results generally the
same as those you have described in the case of the animals?- Exactly.

Cross-examined by Mr. Grove,

Had you occasion, Mr. Morley, to observe in the case that you have been mentioning
the recurrence of the spasms when the patient was touched ? The animals- or the patient ?
—The patient. No, I did not see the patient during- any severe attack. — Did you observe
that with the animals ? — I have frequently.

Lord Campbeix. — ^When touched it brings on the spasms ? Yes, it brings on the
spasms.

Mr. Grove, — ^A very marked symptom, is it not ? A very marked symptom,* in
animals very striking. — Like a galvanic shock directly you touch the animal that has-
been poisoned ? Yes, they give a sudden start, and it passes into a severe spasm. — Did
jou see in the patient that you have described to us, was die during the period of the
time that you saw her in a state of insensibility ? Not at all. — ^Not at all during the time
that you saw her ? No, not at all. — She could not swallow, I believe ?. When I saw her
she could swallow. — ^When was that ? During the week. — Did you see her during, the
severe periods of the attack ? I did not. — ^Have you got here your minutes of. the post-
mortem? I have not,! have a copy. — I will ask a few questions,, probably you will
recollect enough to tell me/as to the post-mortem examination : the lungs, I. believe,, were
<»ngested ? Yes. — Very much congested? Very much congested. — ^Was there. a bloody
ferum in the pericardium suiTOunding the heart ? In a small quantity there was.— rAnd
in the plenrse ? Yes. — Was there a remarkable appearance in the muscles^ in their colour?
Yes, they were dark and stiff. ,

The ^ttorwe?/-(?#nera^.— GeneraUy of the w^hole body ? The muscles generally.

Lord Cajipbeli.. — You mean the flesh ? Yes; the flesh; ■ -

Mr. Grove. — Was. there a large amoilnt of 'bloody serous effusion, over the brain? ^A
decided quantity, I would not Bsrf very large.— W^re there large quantities of red ^uid^in
the membranes of the spinal marrow? Not a large quantity .^-A notable quantity ? A
notable quantity, but not a large quantity of serum slightly tinged with blood in the
membranes of the spinal cord.— Were the large spihal veins much congested ? Yes, they
"'^ere much congested.- — kfid. tbe mi^ftibranfes of the sjiinal marrow, Were tliey also con-
gested? They were- congested; ■ i' ; " ^ ' - ■ • *

Lord Campbell. — We may call it' the spinal cord' 'I suppose ; was that much con-
gested ? Yes, much congested.

Mr. Grofoe. — I believe you opened the head first ? We opened the head first. — ^That
led to a good deal of blood flowing from the heart ? Yes, from the heart. — Could you
judge whether there had been much blood in the heart from what flowed out ? It was a
matter of inference ; it might have flowed firom other sources; apart of it would flow
from the heart.

I 2

132 TWAL OF WaUAM PALMER.

Lord Cakpbeix.^Yoii opened ^e h«ad fitst Mini agood d«fd of blood ^oivre^ent?
Tes, from the blood-yessels 9U{>plying the heftd; a part of that might cosae Irooi the
Jieart — ^Do you mean during the dUsectioa ? Paring the disqeption,.

Mr. Grove, — That would present you having, an, opportunity of |adging, properly
whether the heart was full or empty, opening the head first? It w/^nld ma£e it uncer-
tain; that might partially empty the heart. — Have ypu^exa^nuiea th^ h^ai^ts^ o^ animals

that have been poisoned by strychnia ? A^eat '' '^' - ' ^ -•.< - v _. _- n-

full ? Th6 right side is e^nfeniliy ftfll^VThit 'is

you have perceived the first e£fect 'of ■ the pbi%6h

the guinea-pig we observed no' severe effecti' fof several- fa'6tii«.-^)FWii^ 'n<>t ttk^vjg t^ tilxe

animals on this occasion where you took from the stomach of the pktient, but i^her^'ybti

havo administered strychnia 4t9^t<^ the isti&sniil? ^Fl-Mtt'oiAeixir^il^'Wrsir" ''^' '^~

Lord Cahpbexl.— It! w4at ^ha^eha-^e yVMi administered itt ' Ptffb ist^lifiii'iiyxfed
with Ibod and fonccd thntu 'its^ throat -inift solid itB«e.«-'¥«d made your jexperlmtfnn in
conjunction with Mr. Nunneley? I did. — Do you mean to say youf'httVe'tieVfl*di^ ft
case in which, theve ha^,<^n>^ t}ong as an bono ? My.iaiKpredsiolk i« sok-rt^Haitr foa^nj
case? I have not the notes with me. — Can you speak with any certainty? SoaDe^am'^
mals lived several hc^r^*^— I am speaking as to the effect xxmiing on after the poisovi has
been taken ? I think in some anijnalsi )the interval has been an hpuir. — Have. Uio^e ani^mals
been in the possession of Mr. Nunneley? Some of them were frog$»-— Frogs, Ib^ff^
are peculiarly- susceptible^ Th^ are slower in taking it.^— They axe ookJUblpoded(,aiiir
mals and di&r, though in other respects the symptoms are the same? Ye6.r<-^Yoa dhk-
covered strychnia by all the tests that you applied? Yes; by all Uie tests, with n>oreo5
less distinctness.— Have you in animals detected it where you have searched for4t, yhffit
you have known it to be administered? Yes. — In all cases ? I speak doubtfully ; in<W^
or two cases l.sbould i^el a doubt, but in almost all cases I have discovered it.

X^ord . Cah ?QE|^L.r-:Qn examination of the body of the animal ? On analyaiBg
fLfier\y3J:4^f ,,...,...

IS^. Q/ts)veu-^ln onis ortwoyon speak doubtfully ? In one.—^Was that a case' in whicttt
you had some doubt whether strychnia had been taken or not? We wer<^ sure • that
strychnia had been adminisjteredi our doubt was whether it had reached the ^tomaf^ ; ^^
that case I may say t^ere were appearances which a sanguine eye might say -^f^T^ °®'
fitrJ'chniWe^-^You aid not consider it quite satisfactory ? Not quite satisfactoi*j'. — How
long attfer death have you detected strychnia in the stomach ? Nearly two months^ — An^
after deeomposition has proceeded to a considerable extent ; is that so ? Yes.

Ke-examined by the Attomey-QenercU, c . i

, ! Wljiat quantity, Jklr* Morley, have you given to the animals wl^5^h you liave killed* w^
afterwards hp'e .anftlyssed the contents of the stomach? Tlie qufLu^titiea uxider .9. grain
to two or t^ree grains. — When you fiay under a grain, nearly a gnun ? Between half a
grain and a grain.— From that to two grains? Ye?.^Inw^at«ort of animals? .CatSr
?Mibifii,^'dog*.^-llbw mifth did you give to th^ dog ? We general dosie is from a gram to
two. — That is quite sufficient to "kill an animal ? Quite ^ufficipnt-rTell me how does the
strychnia act ; is it taken up by absorbents and cafif'ied Ihtb the i^t)od? ' I tliiiik It acts on
tUa iMrMe8qri<buti3 pafrtaaaay.'be taken iwtn (he: blo^<-aiHo and. al5t through the blood.^Do
you/thEnk»at iLotsi upoi> tbe nerves immediately on its < introdti^tidn 4ntO' the $tonia«rh ^ In
^actif^uli'jt is ab8Qd)e4 is itnot'? ^ It iS'abioiib«di^Wbirt<3MMs'«fthesel animate did yotf
search to find the strychnia, or the presence of strychnia ? Generally in the tAdmaoh ; in
9PQ /9f^i^jej^w^Cf^rTrWheipe ^ you ««ard» 1 Anttbooi^ii >«Me 2 > >UndecTthe akin : !» tiiat
^^ i^€i,J^i^^9i9JuJl|ite4 tbe .m^imalr^^m-^spdakiAg wh^.titrnvas administered inter-
nally ; there you searched the stomach ? Ye8it-rtWto,«Abl tfkolkilbat wlhiah you found in the
sjpp^chj tte/?^^^TJt^y^ /thfir^ m ^^^p^s h^m^ thjt, wjji^l^. iad beep absorbed in the
^^^f??^i Jl^.yoMl<flf-7T]&ep. ii,i pin4e;r^tanfl yft^.jLig^itlj.,I;ina^ draw this mference from

,i;.MB♦-S^><5Pr^ti§!^w>rTHKp^.Xlobj©ctItoyllm^ j.i/iva.,- m. >. .'i...;. ..

" 1^ Aiiidhhey*6liiJfa^i**^L'BLaii^Ti^^/^^^ is th^ yoaf

opODMn j Cisart^thi^ poisdn^bsing'^a ^oattuai isHit^^taldtfn^nto mti^U^ca^-*-^

'^'•MhiSe^ebnlti^A^^l--^'to'ftff*d<T(*.Mot'kfi6Nr'^^^ ,1. .

'i:ord'CiWi^n^iJ^e)^ay;^r^j^^^^^^ the witness if that ia

Mr. Setjeant Shee, — My friend cannot submit a theory to the witness ; it comes under
a leading question. » > .' a: ..^ - i= i. '^> ..l*."^

LordCAirpiifetL.'^H!fe'ttiiist'n'dtxii^wtli^iiifer^ncfe fi-olit the facts he states, but he
may state facts hypothetically.

*W4fe& n» '^x<;e85 ? I «m not sure that strychnia may. not Ji^. i^ the stomacli and

FOl^HTH DAY, MJly 17, 1856: 133

Tii^i^^hi^W^inernfJ-^iifiAd Hhe Hkt Hdt W}i(e1i 'vms absorbed into the system,
]eftv^^4|tiAtk>ii bi'ttie 9tom$cli; poiAdaffi^ th<^ system and produce the tetanic symptoms
and death, leaving the'^rtiott in th«i stomach which had not come into operation ?

'}!i^VBdf!fif(Mt'She^,--(^'iiott^^ 1 submit it is a leading question,

^'T^^'^tQf^l/'Cl^nei^'fftj^J^QijL s^y t^iit^wliiobywou^d b^ (bund in the stomach would be
that ji^§3jpp^.afitei^Jth^ ifeg^due ii^ he^n absojrbed- in. the system] what operation has that
vMc^^ffesi^W.-^^j^/^^Vys^^W.^ ^'ti^iopeF^^tiptt.p/.poi^on.T-Sufficiently to, destroy

Mr. Baron^ AMa:9«oN^r-r]lt hiift that 0{m»lif», >and> i leb^ves come in e&oess ? I wish to
sajr, tlj^|,^,i:^^h^ .^y jopioion JBrow ii^ry thftn.i»?l)fit,X c<»il4 l>Roi^^.

7^,44'^9pKj/T(^«lMv<ii.'T--l«m asking your opinion ad • a «(ientkfie man ; I will a^ your

xea(^ip»ll,molAQ^t« .-« ^w . ■'! -•■■n I . '■ ■■ / • ^ .■

h LdDd 6Aii#9EZft.-^Witk regard' io theexbem ?' Thcit ^teiimihs' iti tlxe ^omach ; It is
iuetivei'^' '"•' •• ■'♦•.• •" '' " -'•' ' '

act
fnreJttdieiaUy'' without" being absorbed: I think it is an open question. — Suppose the
mininittM quantity administered which being Absorbed filtb ]the system woulcl be capable
of op^jfeting to the d*Wruction tf life, would you e±pect to fltidahylri t^e ktomact then?
I'^ottldeiicpect sometimes to fkil. — I hare' only a question o^ tif p to iisk you on the
ttbjteet Wthe appearance Aat you found on the post-mortem te'*atditktlonY_you told my
feanied friend' that you fbnnd some effusion of bloody serous mattef ptl ttie' braiii, ^d also
some appreciable quantity of red fluid in the membranes of ^e'sp^n^ cord^ and so.on ;
pniy,-myouT' opinion, if death resulted from aseiies of minute doses bf thi^ poison admi-
nistered for a space of seyeral days, would the appearances be likely to be dif^'eht aft^
^th. from what they would be 8iq)posing death was produced TapitUy b^ one dose f^'
Mp. Serjeant Shee, — Is not that a leading question ? ': .r •.■... ,^

Th& Afiomey^Oenerai. — I do not know how else I am to put it. '

I, think it would in some degree ; but I should rather coDuect these appearances,' i^itjb
the lengthened and protracted final struggle. — You mean the struggle on .th^ last day ?
Yes.--May 1 tal^e this to be your answer, that you would expect .a ^^erent resirtt-^ .

Mr. Serjeant Shee. — ^I must object to this.

The Attomey-Qenerah — Would you expect a different state of.ph^omena oi^ ^ J?ost-
mottem ieianiination itlakik thei patient died after a brief struggle?' Cei^tainiyi— tn^thjs
case did TOti'find on the pofet-mortem examination fluidity of thfi blood? ' Th^ biddif W^
fluid. • '" ■' . ™ • • '■ • •• ;■ -^ .■- • • "^

Mr. S&jeixnf Shee.-^^OMT I^r^^^ip will allow me to.aek ii.qi^^sf^bn pi^ tnis.;ipi^;?t

Lord C4.MP^i^.-rX?8» V ^ ^P*WU . ....-..•.• .i i .-i -v.^ f.rm!->/i;-i

Mr. Beryearii Skae^^s M, your theory that:in < the act. of poiaoningi diB^^o^son iki aU^
sorbed.and' coase« to «xipt 'as .poiflon^ las 'fitoychiiia ?! am inclined to think 'so^ : ii have,
tiionght mue^ upon that.qajefs^tV I atn not decidied in my o\itn mind; 1 amtiheiine^

tatwnk>iitfts-«oi.'t. /■[.'-..',;» .-. i./ •-"• • • m*- -•: '^^')->i J-n.-.^

hnd OiitPBlliau^Doeft ttr^chttbrw^nfabiiorb^ Into: the system nlid^rtoa ch^mi^tf
change? A ^rt may be absorb^ into i thq- systehi aod'ttndei^ k>i/lkmMl bhdngti, atfd
*parfmayremainin'tihe«oiaiwhiai«ftittreds''' •' .■.•.■.•.' -i,.. ...,,.!-.. '^ /.i...

Mr. Serjeani Shtej—Vfiuii dieiniWt f^kA^ caii J^ti giv6 fbt jdn^.6vW<ni thkdt^ifHtiia;
after having effected the opt/tk^oii '6f poSfebbliig, deas^ . to be; ^^ychtfiti ^oison Jii ' W
blood ? My opinion rests on the general principle, the getieral HM[ thkt iii"'£^ttfai' on
living bodies organic bodies are generally ohabged^ ot^adlio '^tibstamb^'d^lifij^ Oirthe
humaabodyjSuoh aafoodowawe^cihe^ ar* fireqwpalJy cha»g<&aniowiipoiatk)n4M^Do5ro»kbow
whether strychnia haa not yaA^«l6eoting.thla.opel)aAi€iBodr>oods^ intihe

blood and liver still in the form of i^ltqj^c^^ftia,? 1. 1.^ t^oO^^¥.S$^ ^il ^UeY9 it pos-
sible. — ^What is the nature of strychnia i ^Ihe copi^onent ppt^ of st^chp^a^ ^hat are they ?
Four elements.— Do you know whether li can 'be (lecoinpose3 Sy any sort of putfefyiftg or
fermentative process ? I have no fact to show that it can, and I doubt if it would,

Mr. EDWARD DUKE MOORlfc, sworn.— Examined ^y Mr. JETudd/eston.
Were you formerly in practice as a surgeon? I was.— ^Were you attending a person
that was suffering from paralysis, with Dr. Chambers ? I was. — ^A gentleman of th«

134 TRIAL OF WILLIAM CALMER.

name of CKitterbuck? Yes.— When was that?' I should say abtJut fifteen years ogo.—
Had you been giving him some very small doses of strychnia? I had. — I believe he left
you and went to Brighton , and returned from there ? He did. — ^Whwn he came back from
Brighton did he make any oommanication to you as to his haying taken stronger doses
of strychnia? He did. — ^Now, in consequence of that, did yon give him a stronger
dose? Yes. — Stronger than yon had done formerly? Yes. — Did you make up the
medicine yourself^ I did. — Can you recollect what the dose was? Yes. — What wa&
it? Shall! first tell you what he took? — No; tell us the dose you made u^. I made
three draughts containing a quarter of a grain in each. — Did you give one to mm? Yes.
— ^He took one ? He took one. — ^Were you there when he took li ? Yes, I was : he re-
ported that he had taken three-quarters of a grain during the time he was at Brighton j
he had got to- that amonnt. — You say you saw him take one of the draughts; were you
sent for after he had taken one of the draughts? No, I remained with him some little
time.-— Were you «nmmon«d to come to him? I left him, as he said he felt quite com-
fortable. — ^How long after you had given him the draught were you summoned to come
there ? I should say about three-quarters of on hour. — ^When you got there, in what state
did you find him ? Stiffened in every limb. — How was his head ? His head was drawn
back, and screaming, frequently requesting that we should turn him, move him, and rub
him. — How was his body ? All his limbs were stiff, the >head drawn back. — ^What was-
the shape of his body? The ordinary shape ; the spine was drawn back, the head was
drawn backwards. — ^Did you try to give him something? Yes, we did. — What wafi it?
A mixture with ammonia. — What- did you give it him with ? A spoOn. — ^As you tried to
give it him, what did he do ? He snapped at the spoon with a^ort of convulsive grasp to .
take it. — ^How long was he suffering altogether ? I should say three hours, more than
that before we left him safe. — He lived? He did. — He survived the attack? Yes, he
did. — ^Now, during the whole of the time was he consciotts ? Perfectly so.

Cross-examined by Mr. Serjeant Shee,

This man recovered ? Yes, he recovered. — How long was he recovering? I should
say about three hours from the first commencement ; from the first time I saw him : I
should say in three hours we left him safe.

Lord Ca3Ipb£Ll. — ^The effects had gone from him at the end of three hours ? Yes*-
quite.

Mr. Serjeant Shee,-^Do you mean l3»e effect, of the spasms or the spasms ? The spasms ;
the rigidity of muscle continued come time after that.— *How long ? I cannot sayr—
During the remaining part of the day ? During ithe remainder of the day. — And -some
part of the next ? Yes ; I recollect the rigidity of the nmscle remained for a considerable
time : first, his hands were drawn back in this way {describing) ; when we had got them
round and his hands clenched together, he was much easier than when drawn back with
the spine and the feet in the same way. — After the" contortions and the rigidity of his
limbs entirely ceased, did he still retain some bad effects of the attack ? No, on the con-
trary, as he himself said, he thought hi^ paralysis was better. — It was given him for
parsdysis ? Yes, he had been taking it for a considerable time.

Lord Campbell. — Strychnia is given for paralysis ? Yes. And persons not afflicted
with paralysis would not take it ? I believe it is a matter of opinion.

He-examined by itie.AUomey'G0na3riiL •
It excites the muscles that want to be stimulated ? It excites the nerves.' — ^There being
in paralysis a want of power, you stimulate by weaiUi^f'StFjr^h&ia the nerves whidh act on
the voluntary muscles ? Yes.

Adjourned until Monday, 10 o-iilook.

tf i' ■«■■*»■■■> "^^ ■ m

riPTH DAY'S TEIAL.

■ May 19, 1856.

Dr. ALFRED TAYLOR 'sw*>iii.— Examined by the AUomei/'Genef^aL

You are a Fellow of the College of Physicians? I am. — And I believe Lec-
turer on Medical Jurisprudence at Guy*s Hospital ? I am. — You are the author of a
well-known treatise on that subject^ On Poisons and on Medicstl Jurisprudence. — Now,,
imong other poisons, have you made the poison called strydhnia the subject of your
ttention ? I have. — It i» the produce, -we understand, of the nux vomica ? It is. — ^Is there

FIFTH DAY, May 19, 1856. 135

also In the wtx. vonuca ajxy' poigon of , an aoalogoufi nature 2 There is, called bnich»ia.-~-
Which diners from it only in point of &tren^Lh ? Ye& ; there are^ome chemical differ-
ences.— What is the relative strength of the two ? The whole quantity in nux vomica is
considered not to exceed from half to I per cent, of the two alkalies ; the strychnia predo-
minates in the bark and in the root. — Of the two poisons, what is tiie difference ? It is
relatively estimated from one-sixth to one-twelfth'; that is to say^bruchsia being one-sixth. to
one-twelfth the stren^h of strychnine. — Is it sometimes sold as strychnia, or mixed with -
strychnia ? Most varieties of impure strychnia which aresold contain more or less bruchaa.
So that, unless you are certain of the purity of the articles, you may be misled as to the
strengtii ? You may. — ^I believe you have tried a variety of experiments on animal life
with strychnia ? I have.^Have you ever witnessed an instance of its action on the
human subject ? I have not.-^ln how many instances, as far as you can form an esti-
mate, have you tried its effects on animal life ? I think about ten or twelve instances. —
What description of animal have you experimented upon? Eabbits^^ — Always rabbits?
Always rabbits. — Have the symptoms produced by the poison been uniform or not?
^^ on tjie whqle very uniform. — ^What quantity have you .generally given? A
qnatttity varying from a half to 2 grains and 3 grains ; not less than half a grain. — Have
yoa found half a grain sufficient to destroy the life of a rabbit? Yes. — In what manner
We you ^ven it ; in what form, solid or liquid ? In a solid and liquid state. — You have
also given it in a liquid state ? Yes. — Have you found there was a difference in the time
Nqoired to ^w its effects where you administered it in the liquid and where you admi-
iiistered it in the solid form? Yes. — How long has lit generally taken on the average
before it produced Us operation when given in a fluid state ? In a, very few minutes ; two
or three, nunutes. — ^And how long when you gave it in ike ^olid state ? lU the isolid state,
in the form of pill or bolus, from about six to eleven minutes, J thin^.-r-Haye you found
that the time was at all iuflnenced by the strength of the dose.? Yes, it is influenced by
the strength of the dose, and also by the strength of the animal. — In what way, in your
opinion, does the poison operate to produce its symptoms ? It is first absorbed into the
blood; it is tben circulated through the body, and the poison especially acts on the spinal
cord. — Is that the part of the body from which the nerves affecting the voluntary tnasdes
proceed? From which they proceed. — Now, suppose absorption of the poison into the
blood to have taken place, what time would be required for the circulating process which
would bring the matter taken up into contact with the nerves in the spinal cord ? The
entire circalation through the whole system is considered to take place about once in four
minutes.

Lord Caupbell. — Are you speaking of the human circulation ? Yes j the circulation
m the Klbbit is quicker.

The Attorney 'General, — How is it the absorption would be greater in. a, rabbit 2 I think
it is, from the effects. produced; that will also, depend on the state .of the stomach. — What
condition of the stom^icli would influence that ? As to whether thiece be much food in the
stomach, as to whether the poison comes in immediate contact with the inner sur£i,ce of
the stomach. — In your opimojD^ does the poison aot immediately on the nervous system
while in the stomach, or a portion of it, or must it first be absorbed ? It must first, I
believe, be absorbed. — You stated a little time ago that the symptoms produced by the
administration of this poison, where you have given it yourself, have been tolerably
uniform ; will you describe the series of symptoms from the commencement to the close ?
The anixnal for about five or 4ix minutes does not appear to suiSGer ; -it moves about freely
and actively; .it tlvsn,. when, the poisoab^ns to.act, suddenly £k11s onitftsidu; theire^is
a trembling of the whole muscles of the body, — What sort of trembling? A. sort of
quivering motion through the whole. of the muscles of the body, arising from* the poison
producing those violent and involuntary contractions ; there is then a sudden paroxysm of
it; the fore-legs are stretched out and the hind-legs are stretched out, the head is thrown
Wck, and the tail, so as to give it the form of a bow ; the jaws are spasmodically closed,
the eyes are prominent, protruding ; and after a short time they have a slight remission of
the symptoms, the animal appears to lie ii^uiet, hjjat .the sli^teBt 4ioi^ .or touch reproduces
oonvulsive paroxysms ; there is sometimes a' scream or sort of shriek, as if the animal
suffered severe pain ; the heart beats very violently during the fit, and after a succession
of these fits ti&e animal dies quietly.— <Let me ask you, have you observed whether imme-
diately prior to death there is invariably .a remission of tbe^i^mptoips ? Not invariably ;
I have only known it .has died J[>y having Uidhand over the heart; it has been in a state
of spasms at that time ; in one or two cases ithe animal has died quietly, as if there was a
remission, sometimes U dies apparently during the spasms itself, — What appearances have
you observed after death which would be different from the ordinary appearances of a
person who has died, after death — the outward appearances ; are the jnuscle^^more than

136 TRIAL OF WILLIAM PALMER.

usually rigid ? In some instances the animal has been rigid throughout, that is to say, it
has died in a qNism, and the rigidity has continued ; the muscles so strongly contracted,
that for a week afterwards it was possible to hold the animal extended by the hind-legs
without the body falling. — ^Apparently in its natural position ? I took hold of it by its
hind-legs, so (describing it),

Jjtard Camfbeix. — That ia, it was ca$>able of bemg held horizontally ? Yes.^

The Attomey-Oenercil.^^That would oondnue, you sBLy\ior a week? . I have found it
so long as a week. — Is there aifiythin^ else? I was goipg tb Bxuke .this obstirvatioo, that
in an animal killed the other daiy tfa« body- was flexiiiie at the' time of deaths but it became
rigid in about fire mlnuteb after deathv^Did it oontinve so ? I have not seen it since.
— Have you opened the bodiies of animals tlmt faa^e been.lbus destroyed? ,.I.ha^e.-r-
Have you found any appearances in the stomaoh or intestanes which' would indicate
any injury there ? No.-^In what (Condition have you fotind the spinal cflbrd;. have you
found any injury there? I har^' fbufid in one or two cases congeetion of the vessels
of the membranes.— Was that more than was due to the grayltation of the blood after
death? Yes. — In onhier' bases; i ^understand you, vou haye. not found it?. I haye.oot
found any departure* from the (wdinavy s^tate of blooa.

Lord Campheoll. — >With respect to the spinal cord ? And with req>eot to the Jbiain.

The AttomKey" G4noraU^^\ may > iachide both, may I ? Yes.

Lord CAurraeLL.^— Wfth regard to the brain^ have yon in any ease ftrand a departure?
In the case just referred to, the membranes of the spinal cord and btain.

The Attometf'Cfeneral.-^Those membranes are a continuation one of thie other? They
are ; so that it is**not easy to have congestion of one without congestion of the other.—
To what do you ascribe, the congestion of those membranes where you have fbund it to
exist ? I think it has been due to the succession of fits which the animal has had before
deat^.— ^Yoiu say yo'u have fbund this to be the case in two or three cases you mentioned.
In the majority of instances have you failed to discover any abnormal condition of the
spinal cord or brain ? That is so ; in the majority ; in three out of five I found no
change. - » *

Lord Campbell, — ^No abnormal appearance ? No abnormal appearance.

The Attorney-Generat. — As to the heart of animals thus killed, what hate you
observe^ with reference to that? From all that I have seen the heart has been congested
with blood.

tord Campbell. — ^Both sides of the heart? The right side especially.
. The AiUmey-G^nerah — Have you ever seen a case of ordinary tetanus in the human
sul^ct? Ihav^i but years ago; I have not had much experience of that. — Have you
ever seen i^ in animals ? No ; I saw one last Thursday weejc. — ^What of? Tetanus.— la
the human subject^ Yes. — ^Whatjwas that from: a wound? From an injury to the
£ng»r*— Where was that? In St. Thomas's Hospital.— Did that end fatally ? No ; the
perpon was recovering. — You have heard the description given by Elizabeth Mills, and
by.'Mn Jonesy of the symptoms which accompanied the attadi: upon Mr. Cook? Yes.—
X)o those aymptoms appear to you as described similar to those you have seen in animals
Mf whi«h you have administered strychnia ? They were.—:! think you said that the
period itusoally took in rabbits, from the first manifestation of the symptoms to death,
.waaalH)ui 10 minutes? Yes, it varies froni 10 minutes; 10 minutes, I think, was the
iOBgest where the strychnia was ^iven in^a state of solid. — Are you speaking now of the
<il|iQ«Jt. 'takes- between the adminUtrationi of the strychnia and the first appearance of the
•symptoms, oi: aro you speaking of the time between the^.first appearance of the symptoms
.a)^ theideath? I am speaking of the time from the administration of the strychnia to
^e .^eioraa^ncement of the symptoms. — Then you misunderstood me ; how long does it
take;. ^09^, thi^ tiipe 'the first symptoms manifest themselves to the time of the death?
,Thi9y haM died in varions periods : one^ied in 13 minujbes; one in 17 minutes; that I
sho^d ipention,,i(f:9(4d l^e the whole tinae:.^ — ^Let; npe ask you first, does it make any
4l^ei;exu}e.<w^therl^, poispn is administered in a' fluid or a solid state as regards the
duration of time from the first appearance of its effects to tte termination by death?
The symptoms yjff^^ more rapidly when fluid, and death has taken place in five or six
minutes after.— Then" death takes' plade more' rapidly when it is given in the fluid state?
Yes.— Then' it wiir bfe AfecteSss^tyj ih to^tittttinff the times you are now giving us, just to
mention whether the poi^dn waai gi^h hi a- flitfM or^dlid state ? The experiments which
I have particularly notieed and perfortned lat^y, and which I am about to detail, have
been in reference to solid Strychcfia. — Then give us the various periods in wWch the
animals died ? In the first the symptoms began in seven minates. — These are all cases of
solid poison ? All ; the animal died in 13 minutes. — ^lu 13, including those 7 ? ' Yes, 13

FIFTH DAY, Mat 19, 1856. 137

mnuies from tlie time the poison wat giren : in the second, tne symptoms appeared in
9 mmutes, the animal died in 17 : in the third the symptoms appeared in 10 minntes,
the ammal died in 18 minutes: in the fourth the symptoms appeared in 9 minutes, and
the death took plaoe in 22 minutes: in the fifth the symptoms appeared in 12 minntes,
&Qd the death took place in 23 minutes. — ^Now, in the human subject, suppose this poison
to be administered in the shape of pills ; should you expect it would take a longer period
before the poison hegHn t6'ftctf > I «liohld.<*-W|vy iKyf Becaoie it requtrea that the pill
stroctare should he broken' np^ia order to -bring the poison in contact with the mucous
membnuie Df-ttte'Stonuiehi^-^In the 'Case.of itheaarabbiU which, you destroyed by the solid
poison, did yos not administer it in |iUlsf Yes^^Theo what 1 am asking yon is this:
Given that tfae< poison isladmiaiaitfed in both- cases to the cabbit and the human subject
in the shape of pills; shonM yon expect s longer period before it began to act on the
homaa snbjeot than the-nihint ? I do not think We can faidv dr»w any inference in the
Bpidity of dealfk from stryuhnia between the rabbit laia » human subject. — ^Why?
Circohttion aoddbsQrption are very different^-^Would tha:'ei also be a difiference between
ofto human subject and another, with ielei«nce.to the- p(»wer. of/ absorption to take a
t% up with more or less rapi^ty ? It is very ponibabU that that is the case.

U>Td Campbell. — It would depend on the d&ffetiMioe ef the aabstanee of which it was
oonpoted? Yes, and its earning in oootaci with the atonsach eavly ot iaitew

The Attomey-Oeneral, — ^Would the strength of the, dost make any difference? It
vwldi^You mean the weaker the dose the loager it would be before ivpaanifested itself?
That is to say, a large dose would produce a more rapid e0ect than i^ ^m^j dose. — Kow,
We you experimented upon the intestines^ of animus thal^ you have thus killed, to re-
produce the stnfchnine or to discover it ? Yes. — What, in your ojpinion, wquld be the
correct chemical course to pursue in order to reproduce the strychnia, in the contents of
the stomach ? The principle of extracting it consists in putting the ^tqm^ch.. $iud Its con-
tents in alcohol mixed with a small quantity of acid to dissolve the strychnia.— Sup-
f)sing you took sulphuric acid, for instance, you would thus get^ sulphate of strychnia ?
should.

Lord Campbell. — ^If there be any discoverable ? Just so ; the use of the alcohol 19 to
discover it.

The Attorney-Geikeral, — ^Having got the sulphate of strychnia, how w:ould you next
proceed? The liquid is filtered, gently evaporated, and an alkali added.— I sappo^e^^ou
get rid of the alcohol in that way? Yes. — Supposing you take carbonate of poias^?
.Carbonate of potass is the alkali some prefer, which I have taken. That precipitates the
strychnia. — It combines with the sulphuric acid in the sulphate of strychnia, and so pre-
cipitates the strychnia? Yes, if present. — ^Now, besides this mode of getting at the
stiychuia itself, if there be strychnia present in the stomach, are there other tests?
There are tests applied to the strychnia or supposed strychnia when extmcted'.-^Whdt ftfe
those; has strychnia a peculiar taste? It has. — What description of taste? 'A strongly
bitter taste. — What, o^et* tests are there ? It is insoluble or nearly insoluble in wattor.'^
In what is it soluble ? It is soluble in acid and in alcohol p it is f^eelpitated ^alkalii^
That is, when it is in combination with something else, I presume? When it haK been
dissolved in an acid. — ^Now, with regard to colouring tests, are tbere any tests < of thiit
description? Colour tests are applied to the dry residue after evaporation.-^NoW, 'wltot
substances are there ^hich^ applied in this way*, do produce a change of coionr ? A"mik>
ture of strong sulphuric acid and bi-chromaie of potass produces a blue colour, changitag
through a violet to a purple and passing to a red. — Now, are these colouring tests, as
they are called, certaih afad uherri^^/oi* ai'e they liable to be fallacious? I fhinfcthey
are very f^dlacious, with o*e exception, Wlieii we have Strychnia sepamted iw a'oryst&lMae
state, when we have r^(iogtiis^d the tWstals by theh* fbmi andtheii' ehed[iical"propeHies,
and above all, where they proddce; U the Wbst&nce ffroduees, tetttiic 'b^niptoms aAd
death, when introduced into a wotmd in the ikiii Of kti animal.-^YOu may introduce- the
poison into the system and pripduce all its e^c^gby i^trodlifcing it thrdugh JttypuiHJture
or wound into the skin quiokelP thjvn' W. inlrddticing it into the stomstch? ''Yes.— And it
operates more quickjy in that case?' ft a6e^ j it bpehites mbreqtiJ^klyi' i^^i^Oii takes
place.— It is carried more rapidly into the cirtJujIatioii ? ' Yes.' • . i i

Lord Campbell. — It is thus at bnp^ introduced, into the cii*culatio^'? Yfes.

The AtUmiey-Qeneral.-^AxQ there^ in ypw opinion, other vegetable matters to which
if these colouring tests were applied, i^tmAlar jresults as to colour would be obtained? —
There are. — What are those vegetable matters^ can you znendon any ? A variety of
substances ; a mixture of sugar and bile will produce the purple and red tint. — Anything
else? A substance called pyroxanthine. — ^Whatis that found in? That substance is a
product of the distillation of wood.

138 TRIAL OF WILLIAM PALMEH.

Lord Caxpobouu— What caJeur vill it give ? itprodaeefi piecisely similar cokmrs to
those produced by stryohnia, go that I ha^e knoim persons deceived : in my laboratory^
in performii^g the es^periments, they haye «aid, yoa have g«t strychnine there, when it
has been that mixtoze of pyroxanthme with a nmall qoantity of salioina added to it—
That is the willow-bark? Yes^ — That is what the ttufortanete lady was to ha^e taken?
Yes ; allow me to state, in addition, that that nuEKtare which I have Just mentioned
contains no strychnia, and has a bitter taste ; . so that it mig^t -be mistaken for atryebnia
by taste as well as by colour.

The Attorney-General, — Are vegetable pelsons more difficult of detection by diemical
processes than the -mineral ones? They are. — And the tests, if I understand yoti, are
more fallacious? They arCi— *Have you ydufself, in the case of animals you have
destroyed by strychnia, endeavoured afterwards to discover its presence ? I have.— In
how many instances hare you tried to do so ? In four different cases. — Were you alone,
or assisted? Assisted by Dr. Rees ; he was in conjunction with me. — Was that at Guy*8
Hospital? Yes. What ^testsdid yo« apply? We applied the process that I have first
described. — That is, if I understand you, that you endeavoured to reproduce the
strychnia, if present, and then applied to it those colouring tests which yon mentioned to
us just now ? Yis.-*tIb that the voune yoa pursnedf Yes, and the Effect of 'taste.—
Were you able in those instances t&satisfy ymirself of the presence of strychnia? In one
case by the oolour.test vin another case there was a bitter taste in the liquid, but no indi-
cation of strychnia by the coloar 'test. — ^That disposes of two eases out of the four ; in the
other two was there any indication at all of the presence of stryehnia ? None whatever.—
What dose had you .giv«n in .the case in which you discovered by the taste and by the
colour that there was strychnia ? Two grains at intervals.

Lord Campbell. — ^That is in the first case you mentioned ? Yes, where it was
discovered by the colour test.

The Attorney- General. — ^What dose had you given where you had a bitter taste, but no
indication by the colour test ? One grain of strychnia. — ^What dose had you given in the
two instances in which you failed to indicate any presence of strychnia ? One grain in
another case and half a grain in the remaining one. — ^How do you account physiologically
for the absence of any indication of strychnine where you know strychnia to have been
given, and to have caused deatii ? By absorption into the blood*— So tiiat it is no longer
present in the stomach ? No longer in the stomach ; it is in a great part, too, changed in
the blood. — ^How do you account then, in the case of the larger dose, for the presence of
strychnia ? There would be a retention of some not absorbed. — That woyld be in excess
beyond what was required for the destruction of life ? It would. — Supposing the minimum
of the dose to be given, would you find any ? No, I think not. — ^That is the minimum of
the quantity required to destroy life? Yes; it would be removed by absorption, and no
longer discoverable in the stomach. — ^The smallest quantity you have ever tried on a
rabbit has been half a grain? Yes. — Now, are there any chemical means you are
acquainted with whereby the presence of this poison can be detected iu the tissues?
There are not; there is no process that I am acquainted with when it is in a small
quantity, if it exists there ; so fiir as I know it cannot, — ^Will you tell us, suppose a grai^
dose to. have been administered to any animal, human or other, what quantity would be
due if it is carried into the system through the circuladon to any given part of the animw
organisation ? Half a.grain has destroyed life. — Supposing it to be absorbed, take the half-
grain, or. the grain, whichever you administer, ana suppose that to be absorbed into the
system by means of the circulation, what proportionate part of the dose so administered
would be due to any portion of the body ? Ii you .will allow me, I can tell the portion
contained in the blood.— -Suppose the half-grain to be -alKSorbed internally into the blood,
what, proportion does that bear to the total quantity of the blood circulating in the system r

Assuming the quantity jof blood to be at the lowest 25 lbs. Yon are speaking now of the

human subject ? Yes, that would be one -fiftieth part ; that is to say, one-fiftieth of a gram
in a pound ; a pliysician in Canada has, died from that dose in twenty minutes. — ^From h*l^
a grain ? Yes. — In addition to this distribution of the halfograin over the whole system^
in your opinion, does that undergo decomposition as it mixes itself w:ith the animal
tissues ? I believe it partially uudei^es some change in the blood. — ^Would that inoreas^
the difficulty of detecting it in the tissues? Jt does; I have never heard of its ^^^
separated in a crystalliseji state fi;om the tissuies.-^Are the crystals peculiar, in form ? They
are. — ^What is the fonnof them? They present themselves under, the form of QCtohego»
and quadrilateral prisms terminated by a four^ided pyramid ; sometimes the P'^**^*
wanting, and then the two. are close together, to form the octohe^on ; there are otwf
organic substances crystallised something like then), so that a chemist will not rely on &
crystallised form.— ^Now I believe that after the post-mortem examination had been h^l^

J

FIFTH DAY, May 19, IB56, 189

on the body of the deeeased Mr. Cook some portion was sent up to yoa? It was.~^B^
whom was it deUyered to yoa? It was delivered to me by^Mr. Boycott.— In what was it
contained? In a brown stone jar.-^-Was the jar fastened down? It was. — ^How was it
listened? It was covered with bladder, tied and'sealed.-->-Whfut did it contain ? It con-
tained the stomach and the intestines of J«hn Parsons Cook.— I believe you experimented
upon that withr a ^ierw to asoertain<if there were any poison present ? Yes. — What poisona
did you seek for- iathe^fifstinstanoe? Wesoagbt lor varioas poisons. — ^Tell me what?
Prussic acid, 03calic acid, morphia, strychnia, veratrea, a poison of white hellebore ; the
poisons of tobaooo, hismlock, arsenic^ aeroury, antiflidDy, and other mineral poisona
generally. — Now did you find any of those ? We only found small traces of anthno9y» —
Now, with reference to the search for strychnia, was the part which you had to operate
npon in a £ivoarable condition for finding that poison, if it had been there ? The most
onfiiYourable that could possibly be.— -fexplain why? The stomach had been com^
pletely cut from end to end ; all the contents were gone, and the fine mucous surface on
which any poison, if present, would be fonnd, was lying in contact with the outside of the
intestines, all thrown together. — ^Was there any succulent matter present also ? There was.j
on the sur&^e of the mucous membrane, derived from the intestines, the contents of which
partly escaped. — The inside of the stomach had been forced into this mass of intestinal
snccolent matter ? It had; at any rate, it was lying so. — ^That was the fault, or mis-
fertane, of the person who had dissected ? I presume so; in journeying up to London it
mnst have been shaken about in every possible way. — ^And though there were the contents
of the int^tines, the contents of the stomach were not there; they were gone? They
▼ere gene. — If there had been any of this poison inresent, where would yoa have expectea
to have fonnd it ; in the contents of the stomach, or the contents of the intestines ? In
the contents of the stomach and on the mucous membrane. — ^Had yoa afterwards any other
portion of the body brought up to you to be experimented upoa? At my jrecjaest other
portions of the body were sent. — ^What were those? The liver, the spleen, and the two
kidneys ; in addition to that, a small bottle of blood, unlabelled; tiiat is to say,. giving na
no idea whenoe it was taken. — ^By whom was it delivered to you? Mr. Boycott. — 'Did you
analyse those portions ? We analysed alL — ^What did yon more particularly search for in
this last-mentioned portion? In the liver and kidneys we searched for mineral poison.-^
Did you discover any ? We discovered antimony in an eighth part of the liver ; we
analysed only the left kidney and the spleen, and they all yielded antimouy ; there were
traces of antinciony in each ; the quantity was less in proportion in the spleen than in the
other parts. — ^Did the blood yield any antimony ? The blood contained antimony. — Now
vhst process did you resort to to produce the antimony ? It was reproduced, or brought
put, by boiling the animal substance in a mixture of hydrochloric acid and water ; copper
^ the shape of foil and gauze ; it is a sort of web of fine-woven copper, which was intro-
<^ced while boiling, and the antimony was deposited on the copper. — Having got it on the
Mpper in this manner, did you apply any tests to it? Tes, we applied various tests. — ^The
known and established tests for that purpose? Yes. — Will yon mention any one of
^em ? The experiments have been performed lately in the presence of Professor Brande ;
the copper had a violet eoloar, which was one character of the antimony ; then it was
fi^.— *In short, you applied the welMmown chemical tests for the detection of antimony ?
Yes, I entertained no doubt of it. — ^You say this was done in the presence of Professor
Brande and Dr. Rees ? — >Dr. Bees assisted me in the anaiysTS ; Professor Brande has seen
it subsequently. — Kfeveyou any of the antimony, as produced ? There is a small quantity
still remaining on the copper (producing it). — ^You say you detected some of it .in the
Wood? Yes, in the small bottle.— Would the feet of Its being found in the blood enable
yon to form any opinion as to how shortly before death the antimony had been given? It
is impossible to say with any precision, but I should say shortly before death ; that is t»
^y, within some < days ; the longest period known at which antimony has been found in
the blood, after a person has ceased to take it, was eight days. — How soon after being
taken into the stomach would the antimony get into the blood ? Within my own know-
ledge the earliest period has been ei^xteen hours ; the analysis was made of the liver. —
^ that case ? Yes, the boy died eighteen hours after taking a dose of antimony, and
then I found that in the liver.— Was it a very large dose? No. — ^That was not
the cause of death? No, not at all; it was a medical dose prescribed for him;
about six grains of antimonial powder. — Antimony is usually given in the form of
**tar emetic? It is. — And acts as an irritant to produce, and produces vomiting ? It
^oes.— -Suppose it be given in rapid doses, "trill a portion of it beyond -^hat is ejected by
the stomach &id its way into the blood and into the system ? It would.— If it con-
tinued to be given in continued doses of that description, would that in your opinion
destroy life? It would, if it produced certain symptoms; it may be given in frequent
doses with impunity,^ aznl it may be given so as to produce symptoms which will infallibly

140 . TBIAL OF WILLUM PALMER.

destitnr life, if contiimed.— Did yoo hearth^afccoimt givten lyy Hbtf 9tftMe gfei^V Ait, Milts,
of the frequent TOmiting of Mr; Gook. I did.— Did you abo hteAf 'Ifie'-to^c^ntglt^ii <Jf
his vomiting at l^rewtibuiy?'' I'did.-*-Dld yim i^iao faearHief adcdtttk giVteb by tWajt^
dieal men, GibflOn and Joofe^, abd D^. Bamfli^'s de(fositio<i laA to'fh^ ebii^o&iyii^tlBytttt-
toms? Yes.— Would, or^duW «i*t, teyoot'Of^riiei*, tW6*'i^ttifaiattbV6tt'fceirt-d'«^cf^
be such as to be HaMe to ln^ p«)du«fed %y •tttiti*lo<^'?'"yt%ouM.-^4ii'*li solbWe ft
fluids? Tartar emetie ii.-^Dotes "thtft Mfetrt tfce V»!dtf^Jdf *»y -«««'• hi'WKiA it h
mixed? Not in smiffl <iuajititieft-^That^iB:tor.Ji*y,= #c«tfd «!a«i^a'^qttatitftjjr'.iiif •^miia
suffice to produce vomitiug affed tite tolcftit 8f tU^ fluid iMith Wl/fch It' ^^ iiilx^. '■ N^ ; I
Ijouknot. '■ ■ ■• ■ '•'■•■ "" '"' ;•'.:•<;•)'• 'w. '.. i// i<- •'.•. :-.' ■■

Lord Campbem^.— It voiijadjiot^atf-^fit'^I^e pblpu;:? j( stLppp^p.tpiife'pr.',wi^,iy9^ tef^r to.

The ^«orntfy-^e««-/i/.^Br»t}i,wjtp^>siranidi^?ateri ..lt:TfQuld' liot a^otrihe'icolanrof
it. — Now from these txs^qe^ otjthe.,^tin)QQ}r JA these pcir1;9pftJteibody/t<xn/fJbk^yi)Uiii^
referred, could yo\i fonn ^uy jud^^-^^ ^ ^*^^^ wheu. the autiiaokiy la^a^-itdkeiil It
is impossible to say with a^ay i>recis^Q,bu^ I «hou]/i say wijthiu itii^o'icar .tbree w^^eiki at the
outside ; within threpyeeks,.! shoiiU thinks— You mean bef<3«3e death* Iipreswajie?. Yea
— It must havebeen^ iivyoujj opinioi^ within three weeSts before death? i I tiunkso.--
How recently might tha*:taYe been? We did not fi»d any. perceptible. ^juaiitity. dis-
solved in the^^i4^.of t|i^ ;Wy IM^ the "washings of the stomach ; therefore I should infor
there was no evidie^ice 9f^^J.\gyv^^ within some hours of death; I know l^y experience it
takes a shprtex.lWfl^cto ^fi^t^tq ,th^ liv^r.

Lord Campbell. — ^Might that have been administered within -a, feir days befbre
death? Yea 9 :L rtiilDk -tiiati fwkidi X ftmnd in the liver might have been' 'administered
within ^3 fiQTMfP vf^M^i «t witjhan two days.

The Attomey^General, — I asked you about the colour, but I omitted to ask y-im'afcOttt
the t^s^; doe|3(^ti|no9iy afBectthe taste of aaything in which U is give»?: vNo^ not in
quantities in, which, it Vould cause vomiting. — Suppose a person tossed >ofir a -.quantity of
fluid jwith which there, was this stuff mixed, do you think it would leave any taiste upon
the throat ? It might, according to the quantity present, leave a sensatkMa in the throat;
a I^ge quantity taken at once; it might leave a choking or constrictlaog sensation, aft if
the throat were contnicted. — ^Let me ask you this ; in the various analyses that you maie,
-did you flndaov tnwje of mercury ? No. — If mercury had been recently taken, should
you, have found it ? According to the quantity taken.^ — ^What quantity should you expect
to be taji^en to leave a trace ? If a few grains had been taken recently before deatk I
should Jbave expected to And some trace in the liver.^-^uppaise a jnan had been- taking
mercury for any syphilitic affection within anything like a recent period- before d^th,
should yoif have expected to have found it? I should,— How recenUy before death mi^*
the mercwry ha??e xSeeix taken in any quantity .for that pui)iose,.so aato'leave itstaraoeson
the Uver, or \n a^. of these tissues that you examfined in Cook's eafi^? • < It is v-eary slow i&
passing ,put of. the body, go that if given within -two or. three we^. from death th^e
wpul4 be some traces in the Uver^ or if given within ai few hiours.^pm death there might
berSqme iatl}^ liver.-*T^What quantity, given shortly beffkre .death would you expect to fi^d
appreciably m the liver from post-mortem examinatiQU,? , Tjthiitk^ftn «rmouttt of three
grains, three or six grains might thus leave, soine t^ace; bu^ it is : -impossible to give any
precise answer tp that : I have a recollection of two or three grains of calomel having
biiett' giVten-24 honrsb^ore death, and I foundTnerdur;^ in ' tUb iSr^t j that is the pnly fact
I^n iB^ean opinion of.— palf a graii/ adiiiintistered' each' day tlirfee days before deatn

ir:^8hbtild expect to find some fratees in the'litei*;— Suppose four grain:

bfe'ttikJen ' '^ ^- " -= ^ ^ r^ -

abior^ot^'

Smiih'^iid . _ „ , , . .^ ,

gentTeinjltf'c(f,whbin Mt. Moore 8]pok6^? Yes.— Jd^ffing'/by' ttie results of your own studies
and ^xfef-inieiits Hfith reference io'-the effect of 'stj^ydHnia, d6' you coincide in opinion that
those deaths '^^e ocJfca^ohed hy i^fytchnid? Ye'S.— t)6 the symptoms of Mr. Cooks
attacks a^<J)ear \d yoti to be of a sim^lali-'ic^ratfter with'those of the cases that I have been
just rteftrring to? Tiiey do.— Ais a professor 6f medical science, do you know any other
eause in the nature of human diseases to which the symptoms of Mr. Cook's death can he
referred except to strychnia? I do not.

Cross-examined by Mr. Serjeant Shee,
In the course of your examination, while speaking of antimony, you have firequently

J

FIFTH DAY, Mat 10, 1856; 141

nse^,th9,^9i;«|0 "ttPi^ of. fu^mov^ " ?r Tnices,*^Tnic0& ai|d trace» wbat was the meaning
Qtixs^fSih iA,yj^,miBU qu4o<Uy.TT-«Traiqe in ondinaiy parlance* we know means a small
qmwy^(\ ,Y/^j^riH3\^, Uk a^ialy^ioat Qbi9pii«tfytdqea lA mps.n an in^xmdeFable quantity ?
1 4p Qo<:49p)y,4^,iii ^ai;>^b4^«k7rrlt. hi 4P ire<iiM^N^ ^«p4, m it «ol; i« cheaucal language ?
It ki fopi^^^^htifim^ .]^pf^i^nttofr-<w9Ptew^i|l*/i9^e«mal,.4nfimteai^ quantity would
becall4Hl><»^^^2 I !h9^^ hea^,aA«ii^^i^sin«Jlti|uantUy eaUed a trace.— You -do not
9se,it i^,]f9^r,;^xf^9P9a^p if^tUat 6«a6e,?» I Ja^iaM we* obtained some quantity in that sense
ftoB^,pi«iy,j0^i^a^,jthaf ttw^>4|uai4itydi^s,i?i|lpula4ed 'WfpwJd.ODBake up a ponderable
quantity ^ if^ ^^U^.-r^MijiX ^m* ^ilQW J»^ lP ^f^ ih^ff^vm^ ketomyon ? That is a very
small residue of what we obtamed. — ^What you discovered ^together in all the parts of
the body examined wcmld xpake up a ppnde^ble, quaQtity ? , We have about half a grain.
-Yc*' to hbtf AchirfBy a^ertAfo ft to AtooUht^to fadf'^ gt&h'f No.-^r even to a
qiiartei<)of aij|rldA>?'' Ido^iiot'thiak aqbainer of a ghtitl'wbuld ex^ptatn the quantity we
ol)iKiDcd^--^W^ald'yO» isf^rtak^ toisay {lositi^y'the^e W^s'^ quarter of a grain fbund?
I'wiHiUfid^takAe ^a^ tbe^e wWhaif' a gvaln Yo'4h<6*beat'bf tiiy judgment. — In all parta
rf'the bbd^r^youi^ttninied? Thei^ wa« more itt the -pBtt tof Hie b6ay eitamiued, but we
€i)tftk5ted'<iMrt> q^iAntil5ri--Wii8 it auftimony, orina state-'of lartarHsmetic? Antimony. —
byoufc jUd^entJ would that be Suffieifent td eaiiise death^? '.Nb.— IVIll you have Ae
g«Mii^.t»teU'«iti(if you have them written down it will b& imiReient if you "hand them
in) wlfiul 'UsBiJB you us^ .jK>f the' antbnony ? Tlie ahimal ifcUbstanee wis blood ; I have
described'it.-^-abtf tf^di us as far as getting a deposit in ' %he eopper^fbil Or gauze, and
then you said you applied the usual tests to that, by 'which yoiidisedv^red HUtimony?
Ye8»::7-TJ^is,4^I w^t0 knowJ ■ .m ' . -r ji-

{hatd^iOj^atgvsiu* read>ov€v his notes of the part of tbe eTidmoe deferred to.)
Mr. Serjeant Sliee, — ^Then he said he applied th6 HiStrtil tests : ttoV f -ft^k him what
teats were?' • ' • \

Lord €Jam^»eia. — ^All well-known chemical tests for the detection of that f yoiiVish.
to know what they are ? Under the circumstances, only arsenic or antimOnv could bo
deposited on eopper ; then we applied heat to the deposit on the copper; nd sublimate of
araenic'wai obtained: we cut up some of the gauze containing the deposit, we heated it
*iA nitttite of soda in a platina crucible ; that converted the antimony to antimoniar
soda; that wste dissolved, or rather difiused, in water containing a little hydrochlorii
acid, preoiptlated by sulj^uret of hydrogen, and the precipitate after S4 hours was depo-
sited; it had s reddish-brown colour, like the 8ulj)huret bf antimony, and like it wftfe,-
solttble in strong hydwchlorie acid ; and there were, in addition, two other prociesseS : one
pwtof the acid solution of Mr. Cook's stomach was placed in a glass, afid a piece of thi
immersed in' the aoid 'solution ; there was a black deposit 'on that indicative dfairtl^
nway; some of l!he sotmeaeid solution was placed in contact With pure ziii^^ ttiere wa^
also abiaek depoisit* oa the zinc : and wfien the Whole was dissolved in tiydroihlbrlfc.
a«d, the black precipita^ was' converted into antimoniac aclcl, peroity'di^ of iintimonyt
I bave no doubt ^j^haWer/flfdm IS yedrs* practice in those tests bt tho6e procfe^ef, that
it was antimony ."^I BUpj^ogetlre MlUrfe dt fnaccoTacy of one stfep in the long p^o(iessS; dr'
thebadness;of theqiwaKty <tf^one'Of thejAftt^rialsused*, wotdd <entiretv' defeat' the ^ffe'dtf-
It might afflsct' the testflt, but I ^sed puris materislTs: ' ' ^ ' ' • , , " '^ f

Lord CAMpiJEtti-^That wil^ be mkttei^ of observation. , . . , ^ ...

Mr. Serjeant *S^^V,— ^uph ap. accident .irijght; take place .witlxoifi; your, having a»y,ij[?.^ifr,
niation of it in the cou^^ Qi ith^ l>roC|^.ss ?, , f^y^—Ypu, think not ? . Jifo^ — Ypu Miy . tlit ^^e
antimony that you, di^yeired, jpaust have be^u t^efli, TTAthia thr^ weeks ^ ...Tnajt is.;mF'
opinion; it may hj^ve \3&^jx i^^nyfi\ff\Xi.1^^i^V}^^

by experiments upon th^ t^uijaaii s^bj,e,ot a^»up;0(i^ .jgiji^wnAlif?. . jt i^ ,fpr;»ed on, ,the Q]Mprva,-rj
tionof the rapidity witU wh^^jji; ftn;ti^ya9py gets' 9^^^ body.— In ^iffiais,^*,TOW.,H5r

man ? Not so much m anlmais as; . inii^i;u— :ij)pes it ditfer, in at^imals^ apd '^len, r-rTT)^,liav«>"{
not tried those ej^periments pn,fEtniin^s.rT^Hav^,vy^^.any re^Q».<i<^ »t ?TO^Wigi^jt(Ottti:

as quickly in animals as Kmen? t^S^bjadj A^^,PP^9b^¥y^W^^ ^^^ytr-rA^e ;yoii*i
acquainted with the works of Or^,?,; Y^^.— Js jie iU9jj,m the Jii?fh?§it r^i^qf.a^lyjbioal;
chemists? He was; lie is deaiiBU— ^WpiiMiy^^U ,^y^;^y;dQuU^.W..yW |p^,W^M /^.ock*
taat It was found in a dog 4, Vi6^ih& m^r tk%^^^oj^'^ iJ:^il^if^jft9^rJ^f,1^P' read
the quantity taken.— The qvLantit;f/isj4|'i;^n9]i,,q|lw^ the^

quantity; he took about 45 grainfi.rr"^ AOg.^^AP.foK .4 entijre^^^ths.^ad, takej^ ^o,.
^Daetic, having taken 3 grammes in iO.day^ /, CW<w hm^y^ 4?,g^^? i?> Wjdg^ys), '*>ut
who had not taken any for 4 entire montiis, the. me.t^l was foUfE^d accumulated. in, the
'^^es ; the liver contained also a great deal, and the other tissues but very little " ? Will
you pass the book to me ?— I will read iit to^ori hi' th« 'French, if you like ? There is no
<luestion about the fact, that when antimony has been Icmg in the body it passes into the

142 TRIAL OF WILLIAM PALMER.

bones; I have said nothing about Cooik^s benesr-^This is -in the IlTer? There msy hare
been some in the liyer, because it remains a long time in that ; bat we found it in the
spleen and the kidneys* — ^I vrjM give jyou another immediately^ pireoeding? Be^des, 1 do
not think you aie reading Orfila's expeximeatsu^I will read it hi the French ? But they
are not Orfila's experiments; Orfila is quoting the expeiiments oCam)idieri>er8eif. — ^Be it
so ? You attributed it to the character of Qrilla. — la poinl of ftiit» that i»tfae> case vith
every single instance in your book ? No^' I. do not say tfaat-*-We wHl Me that pt-eseatly ?
What I wish to say is, ^uave quoting experiments which were Bait<petAii«ied by Orfik.
— I do not BAy they were, hut J find it inhis book; I read this to ytm. o«t' of his book:
*' A dog was killed 3^ months i^ter all antimeniAeal administrntioD to hkn kad'eeased ; he
had taken 3 grammes " (which is 45 grains) *'of envHio in* 10 day«" ^ Where was tiie
antimony found ? — That is what I meant : ''Ajitimony waslbnnd oondenseA principally data
la gras'^? In the fat.— So I thought: *' It was i found condensed in the ftt; the liver
contained some of it, also the bones and the other tissues 9 abosit 60 ^grammes of it tar-
nished as much as 500 grammes of the rest put together " ? I know; after antimony fass
been 4 months in the body^.it goes out of the liver, kidneys, and spleen* nnA goes into the
bones and fat. — I do not see huow it gets out of the livei\ because he writes, " The Imr
contained some of it as well as the bc«es " ? Let us have it quite fEurly ; if joa readjtlie
last part about the proportion sontained in aU the tissues, compared witn yfhaV 'waa

contained in the fat * — I think Iresd it you all? You'eill see wint an enormoofl

difference it makes. — ^You pointed it out ; but still it does not affect what I called your
attention to, that, after 3.i months, the liver contained some of it? Some of it; and
allow me to tell you this, that 45 grains given to a human being ever 10 days in food is
not a case which I ^m a^t 4II supposed- to give an oi^iaion ofMrn ; I havcneTer Imewnsnch a
case. — And in the next ipstauce (the one I read to you first ; it was after 4 months), ''The
metal had accumulated' in the bones; the liver also contained a great deal, the other
tissues very little" ? Then, I think, it proves clearly this ; if any person was to take 45
crains of antimony over a period of 8 or 10 days, possibly some might be found in the
liver after 4 months ; everything must depend on the dose and ^e mode of giving
it. — 1 suppose it requires a pretty good dose to poison people ? Not such a pretty

food dose as you think : it depends on the mode of giving it more than the dose : a
og has been poisoned by 6 grains given in a certain way ; but you have not men-
tioned that two of the dogs died in that case from the effects of the antimony. — There
are other cases, then ; what I have called your attention to I have done formally, as far
as I was enabled to do so ; but I have no objection to call your attention to that, if you
Eke ? There are two cases of dogs that died from it. — liiere is one just above ; a dog
fed 10 days with aliments mixed with emetic, 3 grammes, that is 42 grains, in the whole,
died 6 days after they had ceased to give him that aliment ? Yes : when antimony has
been given in that way to animals for some<,time, it generally affects the liver: the
persons whose experiments you are quoting have found that the liver became fatty and
brittle : Cook's liver presented nothing of the sort ; therefore. I should infer from the
absence of any change in the liver, the dispersion through the kidneys, the spleen,
or intestines j there is nothing said about that in the dogs.— You mean, in the two first
I mentioned ? — Those you mentioned of a long duration : I should infer that the anti-
mony in Mr. Cook's body had been much more recent than those experiments would
show ; but I cannot decide positively when antimony gets out of the body ; it differs in
different persons: the best opinion I can give is^ it is withib 2 or 3 weeks of death: 1
had to analyze the body of a person who had takmi 8 grains 24 hours before death, and
it had all cleared out : in 4 months it got out of the fat and bone*; you did not find it in
the stomach and bowels. — But we find it iathe liver ? But not in the stomach and liv^f •
I do not form my opinion from one case, but frpm aJil^ — ^Whenweie you first appli^ *^
to investigate this case ? On Tuesday, 27th November.r-By whom ? By Mr. Stephens,
introduced by Mr. "Warrington, Professor of Chemistry to Apothecaries' Hall. — ^Did he
put you in communication with any solicitor ? Not- on that occasion : I do not think he
mentioned it : I am not sure whether it was on that day, or subse^ently, he mentionea
3SfIr- Gardiner's name. — ^Had you known Mr. Gardiner belbre ? No. — Had you been at au
concerned in any recent cases at Bugeley before that? No/-<-After Mr. Stephens spoK^
to you these jars were sent up? No ;. he came with itt Mr. Boycott and he came t^^
ther. — You wrote a letter on the subject; and is this a passage of it: " We do not hna
strychnia" ?

Lord Campbell. — ^You must read it all.

The Witness. — ^Head it all, if you please.

Mr. Serjeant Shee,—^Ot course I shall read it all. I believe, with submission tojo^
Lordship, I may question him, undertaking to read it immediately afterwards.

. FIFTH DAY, HXY 19, 1856. 143

Lord CamotjKIJi. — ^No.

The Witness, — ^I would ratfcer have it all iwrd.

Mr. Serjefmi Shee, — ^I will read it all to you then. It is in reply to a letter received
fjfom Mr. Gardiner.-**** Dr. Rees and I have compared the analysis to-day. We have
sketched a report, which trill be ready to-mormw or next day. As I am going to Durham
Assizer on the part of the Cfown, in the case of Reg. v. Wooler, the report will be in the
bands of Dr. Bees, No. 26, Albemarle Street. It will be most desirable that Mr. Stephens
should call on- Dr. Recs, read the report with Him, and put such questions as may occur.
In reply to y«Mir ktter Teoei ved hero this morning*! beg to say Aat we wish a statement of
all the medaoineflrpresoribedfordeoeaeed (until* his death) to be drawn up and sent to Dr.
Bee& W«db not find adryofani&e, pmssio add, or any trace of opium. From the con-
tents- haviag bees -dxlMBed away it is now impossible to say whether any strychnine had
or had not beea giTen jast before death, but it is quite possible for tartar emetic to destroy
li& if given- on vepeated'doaetr Bnd, so fartis we can at present form an opinion, in the
abseaee of any natural cause of -death, the deceased may have died ft*om the effects of
antimony ip this or some other form." Was that yottr opinion at the time ? It was. —
Tliat the man had so died in theabeenoe of' any other bause? That was all we could
infer from the ohemioal analysis.-^fibve you wH told me to-day that the quantity of
an^ony that yoii' found in Gook's body was not sufficient to account fbr death ? Per-
My so ; but what was found in Cook's body was not all ^at he took : if a man takes

lotimony -.-—Do you wish to add to your testimony? 1 do, because I see it is only

aHttie mieimderstanding! if a man takes antimony it' produces this effect; first, he

vomits, by which some passes ovut of the body ;' some may escape by the bowels ; there

is a great deal that passes at once by absorption, and is carried out A^ith the urine : I find

by OrfiU, whom we are all inclined to rely upon, that, from 4 to 17 hours, antimony is

found chiefly in the urine. — ^Do you mean, on your oath, to say ft'om such traces as you

foond in Cook's body of antimony, you were justified in stating your opinion that his

death may have been caused by antimony ? Positively and' decidedly so : the amount

found in a dead body is not the slightest oriterion of what he may have swallowed : I

Iiaye sometimes found less arsenic in a body than would account for death. — ^But if the

amount found is not the slightest criterion of what may have been administered, how does

that justify you, as an anidytical chemist, in stating your opinion so small a quantity

may have caused death? I have not said what quantity may have caused death : I have

aid a certain quantity was found in the body, which may have been the residue of what

had caused death: I will explain it to the Serjeant; I see the point you are working at. —

Do not explain unless necessary to make your answer understood : I do not want speeches,

I vant answers. — ^I do not intend to make any speech : we found antimony in this body,

and we oould not aecount for its being there: I wrote to know whether antimony had

been given as a medioine ; and I considered, as people had died from antimony, it was

necessary to have information of the symptoms connected with l^e man's death, which

I knew nothing aboat at the time ; finding andmony there, and no explanation, I put it

as the only hypothesis to me to aecount for- death. — At the time you wrote this, that in

your opinion the man had died from the effect of antimony, had you any reason to think

any undue quantity had been admiaiBtered to him ? I could not speculate on that from the

quantity there, £or 1 did not knorwat all what quantity he had taken, or whether it had been

prescribed medieinally. — ^Do- you mean by this opinion merely to state that it was barely

possible he might have taken so much that he was poisoned by it? The opinion was based

upon this, that anftimony may hare been* the' cause of death : many people will die fh)m small

and some from larger qnantatiesi'-^Antimony in' sufficient quantity? Yes; the quantity

found in ihe body is no oriterion of' what is- taken.-- May not the injudicious use of

<iaad£-medicines eonteiniiig antimony, suck as James's powders or other mixtures, have

accounted for as mnoh antimony as yoa fbund in the body of Mr. Cook ? Any anti-

monial prqyaratiiOB would. acoomit for it.— An izijudicious use of James's powders ? Yes.

--Or even, the judieions use ? It may be so.-^Do you mean to say, with that knowledge,

<!0Q8iilted by a gentleman whO' appeared to entertain suspicions, that you felt yourself

aathoiised in giving an opiniott that this man died from the poison of antimony ? You

^ue perverting my meaning' entiliely ; I must really say, what 1 said in my conclusion

vasthis, "tiuit antimony under the form of tartar emetic may occasion vomiting and other

symptoms of irritation, and' that in large doses it would Oause death/ preceded by con-

^niisions:" then, ''that antimony and tartar emetic may be given as a safe and innocent

medicine." — What are you reading from ; this is not your letter? It is my report ; I do

not see you are justified in malung use of a private letter to a sdicitor ; 1 sent in a

leport. •

I/ord Campbell. — Put that aside, if yon please, Dr. Taylor ; the learned counsel if
i^egalatly examining you on tiie contents of that letter.

142

TBIAL OF WlILL\Ar

f'S —

f>

bones; I have said nothineabontr ,. ,
been some in the liver hlf o ■ ^""^^ '''"•"'^•

spleen and the ktdneys'^r't"! f " "'"'"'"« '^ 1"'
not thiufc you are re^iJ Jrf 5'7'' >«" """•'"
are not Orfila's experSu- oJi*'''*'""^'"'^-
so ? You attributed it t^ th« „k " "* •<"""■"-' '
every single instance u 7ow b^k ^'v "','""■''
What I wish to say is Z^^^ ■ ^"' ' ''" '"
-I do not say tiJyXTClTT'^ !^''''^"" -
:' A dog was kiUed 3* m^th^ i, '',1^ '" ''- ■ ' •
had taiien 3 gramme!" a^m ?'•'"' "" ""'"''■■•

antimony found ?-That£ WW t'"^^ *"•"'-■ '
fo^™*"? In the fat -1^^*,^ "'■""'=•■ '••
contained some of it also th *'^o"gl't: '■ h •

nished as much ^ son i^o ^^ '"""•'^ "i"' «'

been 4 months in th^tef? "' "-e r,.., , „.
bones and fat.—I do nT^ #°** ""* '" *"•• '
contained some ofit as wdra^*;]:/! "^''^ -
last part about the pron^rti^n "'■''••'' •'
contained in thefat-l™^ t T- ''""""""I i-
difference it makes~5^;T^ '""'^ ^ '''^"'l i'
attention to. ".a? after 31?'"*'^^ " "" ' • "
allow me to tell you fti,Hr"'* ""-' I'"-
not a case which /am at i /' '•"' ^''"'"^ ^ ■
case.-And in the nt^t fn!^ sn^osed t,,^,- ,. ,
inetal had aceumuwX */'"' ""'^ '
tissues very little" Then T t , ^T'^ *'
grams of antimony over ?'n„ •,"'''." ' ■
iiver after 4 months? even r'^ "' ' ' '
«.— I suppose it r-L ■ i^^'"^" '^'■'

«ood dos^as you Sr'-f J'"'>- ^•'■■■
dog has been ^olin^f ^/'/ojK.uls ,.,.

tioned that two of the h7 ^.S''''"'^ ,":■
are other cases, t°hen%ha?r'h' "' "
lIL^rTtrfa^re^w^ -"^^^^
^d.0day3';^^arenTmi"4•';::^■

at^ce ^f°tfy^S|-r' '••

•m^«, • iTr A nose ^ou i)«.

inony in Mr. Cook's hr '.

show J but I cannot d,.-

^liferent persons: the I

iiad to analyze the Ikk' •

It liad all cleared out • "

the stomach and hov

1 do not form my .
to mvestigate tJ^".
introduced hy ^
put you in col
mentioned it ■
Mr,Gardii;(-
concemed
to you th'
iher.~^\
fitrych' ■

J

r
-I

:>

^or

^ — "^

«t A/fMtnr: :h>m liic

^» Mirrtania hid vc

.-4 •rrJcuKi TO *»i?;nnr

«i. t DUIEOD Jl Tiif

. ^ ^ ta IM ef<i<'.TS IT

.« gi" J.fr m ill TtTT

* »«■ c Jftter, 'ST!- ?b
. ••-▼ jwd he&^m i;
* ir * X IT eight 'irv,,

«,.«r . ft 90 snppoge 1^

. .^mnx 'T»r death, izi,
■ ..• risKia that it Yii %
. ..'cai :Q<?mist, dc '^o-
•fwia consulting v.q
eiiroar to procure the
.jc'.aitp as etfcctiiaily,
.. le chances «^ teat
.!/» ""Hfople. — Thee TOtt
» . uir statemmt of the
. -u -vIt upon hearsay,
.. .ciiance on it at ail ; 1
.. /lujnDfnt to be lEdn-
.. a ioiowiedge, bnt only
. Kisment to be infln-
. . . r. Stevens told you did
,..u Ai writing to Mr. Gar-
. .4 lain case. — You do iise
a u^ )pinion in the absence
cii 01 antimony in this or
^ . -"m my book I should be
-. , nnd that is quite neces-
M&oo :' ^ A medical jurist
w.ii:* of a stomach is by no
-uu, since it is frequently
..>-uii or caused death when
-^. -.aiuja: appearances of irri-
-•i it in a mixture except
•a* means, if we had found
.-« conclusion the man had
>..> -tf tiiay have died of it.—

- uu>on you say, " It would if
•^ ^uiiiity of which cannot be
amiv. which are onlv poij-on-

* •»> : but if you spread the

- "J* case of those dogs, they
-*<. — Yott attended at die

i »*^t day did you go there
a> * vjmi muember. — Were yoa
^t oiuence to be read over to
iber who was the tirst
if you. like? I think
^J«n was goue into first.—
*H4 hear Lavinia Barnes
Mills. — Did yott hear
? t>« heBir Jones P Yes. i
:50w many of those ten
"*»• «-^f*«-nmt:nt*rd some years
-i ^>e - . .t y>c» wjih the poison
' '■* ''-->k >|M^coii.: you tried a
< -- '-Jc^ \o«. saT vearsaao:
.x*^C3i^ ^ «r£?oruueuce. — How
^^•^ «^ Lie ciiccis at' strychnia

. ...«

FIFTH DAY, Mir 19, 1856. 145

poilon OB uiiimJ life vhich ^xm had when jon.vrote tlwt book ? Th&t wuall; I have
a gremt objection to destroy life except from great neoeSiiij.^Do not you consider sreat
. necesiily acites when it is for the pai^KiM 01 saving bnmsn lif^ and detecting crime ?
That majbe lo; bnt CTery-loxicoluciit vill not MLcrtfice 100 rsbbitg when Ibe Ibcts are
all Rscertainad from other l oi u wtB ; I did aol feel fnyself juetified in gtsng on on points *
which r kncvvere »dt attUisbed. — What did you exi>erim«Bt on the last rabbits?
^nee the-Biqiteit,^ — DA ocrt yoiitUnkit iirrstto- nlsb-M jadge of tbe efieots of strychnia
poison (mrinaii bj' so -uDallBn exp«newte Mithatef Ma'anlnalsof a pertisBlar Epecies?
I tbink yon wiEt^ddto exp^nient tl^ ttxperieacq dwivad from Ae study of poisons of
something like.^S jears. — That is Vaij fomided. on the expcrincnis of others? And
your own. coljettmn of ca|^— JDo riot jijiu ftist a raLTJit is a Tery inferior animal to
select ? No,— TVouU oot a 4pg be mjich.Wtter?' DogB^are very dangerous to handle;
I have a very great (figincliuatLpri " ■- - ■ - ■- le

that as your answer? Ikjio^ffh; ^

to th^^fiuman being for this reoso t;

nov n rabbit is a much more^ n le

either tjlo'' time of dealhor^flie c s-

oover the physiological fact.— f ta i-

menled on dogs is that you art afi ed

on them Thave had no iuclinatii to'

e^iperimoitt upoa> particularly as It

So, 1 .do oat.— But as to the effed dt

ia quite as good as any animal ths ts

Weration. — You went lo the inq >.

Gardiner was there; the first fimt st

questions to the coroner ? I di( ly

addressing him; I saw that he di i;

did he put them ? Yes, he did, or they were answereil by the witnesses ou mj merely
addressing them.— Were Mr. Jones and Mills exaroioed before Eoi>eFts ?' That I do not
remember. — You remeinber Roberts being eaamined, do you not? 1 think Eoberts was
examined afterwards. — And you examined after him? I really canool ' l«II th« ofder in
vhicb (he witnesses were examined ; the only evidence 1 particularly attended lo was
the niedical evidence, and the statement of Mills and Barnes. — Ton heard Koberts sa^,
did you not, before you gave your opinion, that the prisoner had bonjfbt strjcbnia in hj»
stop oa the Tuesday? I think noti Eoberts was qxamined after me, but I knew
stijchnia was bought before we sent in the Report.— You knew that before ? , Yes, it was
ia Mr. Gacdiner's letter to which that was a reply which the Serjeant read; Mr, Gardiner
gaio th« information in that letter, I do not know whether it has been prodoccd, that
slrychoiaj prussic acid, Bitlcy's sedative of opium, had been bought by the prisoner; that
was before the report i/oi signeJ. — You mtan bought oa the Tuesday ? , Yes.— 1 had npt,
seen that letter? That led to my putting in the tetter which you read, that np trace of
strjchnia, prussic aoii or morphia, had been found ; that was an answer to the mqnirji- ;
it was ten days before tfie iiiqu^t that 1 knew it, — Then it was with that knowleilgii, ani^
after hearing the evidedcp of Mills and Jones, that you^ve your opinion? ^TTes,; 1 dci|
lot associate th^t knowledge at all with the fects ;^we signeil the report aftcf we Jjoei'^
strychnia had bten.VoKeht; we did not allow ittoiafluence our judgments.!^, the }^^
■legree, ,,,',.. .■■■■, ,■ , • u .' .

[M the reqiieit.'vf 2f/\ Se^ifiit iAce tie. £>cpo^tum of. T)r..Tay(or befei^ tin C^rgnff ^Wi*]
.' ' : ... -tviid bn Mr..Strtiiill>i,} . . ■. . i ,.-.■

Your evidence baiing^^ieen giveoiOnahatjOGcasioU, yoa relnmcd ,to tsvi)^, I suppwei?,
Yes. — And I sappoie^auismn ■ftei-'lnisw tMi liba prisoner i»i been oimitutted oi>. tliitt
'^pgeofWiUiit Munlo?/ YeE.—^Aai ym koaw.of course. th«L faia Ufe ilepeitd*d in a.

Kl degree on your t^miion i* MoiJEay opision watiKrefarencetO'tbadeMh by poison;
-pressed no apinionof theipriasnt^'sgiiilt. — Yon, kncrw that ^on 'would. bawsanuaed.
^ a witness inaU probabil^ npaa faiii-tn&l?- Yes.— Didyou Ibisdi. it.youidKty.iltttiw-
'a? that, to abstain from all pwtdie discussim of the question whick rai^t JBduance the
public mind ? Yes.- Did yon. write a letter to the ' Lancef on tke subjaaCf I did, c»m-
^^cSng several mlsstatcmants ^hioh were made regarding my evidenEe,--— Now, I will
jWTetiiewholeOftlmt letter read, if yon and my Lord -think right — Yes; aad the date,
rf you please.

Mr. SfTjeani 5S«.— The dale is January, lP56i there is no more precise date to it thm
™st ; ihe newspaper is dated February 2nd.

Mt. Straight. — "Correspondence. ' Audi alienna partem.' The Bugeley Suspected
Ofcret Poisoning Coses. A Communication from Alfred S. Taylor, M.D., F.E.S., Pro-
'^^r of BfedtMl Jurisprudence at Guy's Hospital, to the Editor of the Lancet"

146 TRIAL OF WILLIAM PALMER.

The Witness. — ^That "was in answer to what had appeared in a previous jouma).
Mr. Serjeant Shee. — ^Is the ** Audi alteram partem** yours ? No ; it is not.

The Attorney-General, — Is any of the heading yours ? No ; it is not, it is the Editor's-;
he inserted certain observations in reference to the case, misrepresentiug the case and
misrepresenting my opinion, and I wrote that in answer.

Mr. Straight. — " Sir, I have great pleasore in replying to the inquiries contUBed in
your leading article of Janoary 19tb. 1. I stated that I had never known antimouial
powder, when given in medicinal doses {u e^ from 5 to 8 gjrains at a dose;, to prodoee
violent vomiting and purging. I am aware that experience di£for« on this point ; that
some have foimd this substance inert, whole others have fovnd it very active. From
some recent experiments on antimonial preparations, I think it not unlikely that the
powder may sometimes contain arseniate of lime. Dr. Pereira rafentions, that in the
large dose of half a teaspoonfal'it on one occasion produced violent vomiting, purging;,
and sweating ; while in still larger doses (120 grains at a dose) prescribed by Dr. Elliot*
son, it occasioned in some instances only nausea. I have never met with any case in
which serious symptoms ooald be referred to its operation; and in the case of Ann
Palmer, this medical preparation would not account fur the autiroony found in her body.
2. My statement as to the cause of death was, that the deeeosed died from the effects of
taiitar emetic, and from no other cause."

The Attomey'General. — That does not appear to have anything to do with this case.

The Wt»»MfM.— Nottiing at all.

Mr. Serjeant Shee. — Go on, if you please.

Mr. Straight. — '* That is the opinion which Dr. Kees and I formed from the result of
our examination, and from the description of the symptoms under which, the deceased
laboured during the eight days which preceded her death."

Lord CAMPBfiiil*.' — ^What has that to do with this case ?

Mr. Serjeant Shee.— If your Lordship will forgive me, I have fully considered what I
am doing ; I do not want it all read, I only want the last paragraph.

The Attorney-General. — ^If it is to be read, we must have it all, to see the character of it.

Mr. Straight then read the letter as follows : — ** It is an opinion which I believe is
now equally shared by the two medical attendants of the deceased. We are quite pre-
pared to maintain this opinion on the trial. You will excuse me from entering into our
reasons for this opinion on the present occasion, as this may form a very fair and propor
subject for cross-examination at the trial. Possibly the defence may be, that tartar
emetic in small doses is not a poison, that it cannot under any circumstances destroj
life, and that it was the very best remedy* for the disease (English cholera) under which
it was stated the deceased was labouring. One other point connected willi this inquiry
may be here adverted to. The examination of the organs was made fifteen months, not
* fifteen weeks,* after death, and the viscera examined were as well preserved as I have
seen them in many cases of arsenical poisoning. They were in a better state of pre-
servation than the viscera of Walter Palmer, whose body has been buried for a period of
three months only in a leaden coffin. The viscera in Ann Palmer's case were in such
a state of preservation as to allow us to form an opinion of their -condition. 3. This
inquiry rewrs to the elimination of antimony from the body. According to my expe-
rience, antimony is analogous to arsenic in the rapidity with which it enters into the
blood and passes out of the system,. These two metals are wholly dii&rent in this re-
spect from mercury and lead, and probably from copper. I shall be most happy, after
the trial, to furnish you with facts and authorities, as far as I can, in reference to these
interesting points. In the mean time, as this question may also form a fair subject fot
cross-examination, a detailed answer to it may be for the present reserved. 4. The
fourth inquiry involves, as you have justly suspected, an error of the press. Whst I
said was to this effect : that if there were symptoms of fever, antimonial medicines nay
be fairly prescribed. In concluding this letter I would observe that during a quarter of a.
century which I have now specially devoted to toxicological inquiries, I have never met
with any cases like those suspected cases of poisoning at Bugeley. The mode in which
they will affect the person accused is of minor importance compared with their probable
influence on society. I have no hesitation in saying that the future security of life in
this country will mainly depend on the] judge, the jury, and the counsel who may have
to dispose of the charges of murder which have arisen out.of these investigations."

The Covert adjourned for a $hort time.

Dr. ALFRED TAYLOR, further cross-examined by Mr. Serjeant Shee.
Will you have the goodness to attend for a moment to the last paragraph of your
letter ? "In concluding this letter I would observe that during the quarter of a century

FIFTH DAY, May 19, 1856. 147

whicli I have now especially devoted to toxicological inquiries, I have neyer met with
any case like the suspected cases of poisoning at Rugeley. The mode in which they
will affect the peraon accused is of minor importance compared with the probable in-
fiafuee on society. I have no hesitation in saying that the security of life in this country
will mainly depend on the judge, the jury, and the counsel who may have to dispose o(
the charges of .murder which have arisen out of these investigations." That is my
opinion now ; I find it stated bioadly aauL openly that stryehiua might canse death, and
that if it did it wo«ld always be found in the body, which I deny ; it is untrue ; it will
lead to the loss of hundreds of lives: it has been circulated in every paper that a person
could not be killed by taitar emetic; that I deny; it is untrue, and will lead to hun-
dreds of lives being destroyed^ — ^And did you thuik it a right thing to publish that
opinion befi^re the mna was put upon his trial for life? I had no prejudice against the
man ; ,1 merely say as to the investsgatioa of the facts of the case ; I entertain no pre-
judice whatever ; I miaifitain- th« principles of soience which I there comment upon : if
those statements which I have seen circulated in medical and other periodicals were to
have their weight, there is not a life in this country that would be safe ; that is what I
say. — Then do you adhere to your opinion that the mode in wiu«h they will affect the
person accused, that is, leadiiS^ him to the scaffold, is of miaor importance? No. —
Compared with their probable influence on society ? I have aever suggested the leading
to the scaffold ; I hope he will be acqaitted.^-What did you meau by " The mode in
which they will affect the person accused is of minor importajace compaied with the
probable influence on society'" ? I say the lives of 16 millions of people are of greater
importance : you are putting that as a sort of objeelion to my views in evpence : I find
here in two dead bodies antimony ; one of them died suddenly ; the other, I find the
body saturated with antimony, which 1 nerer found before in my examination of 300
dead bodies in this country, and 1 say this circumstance demands explanation. — ^And
you adhere to the opinion as a medical man and a member of an honourable profession
that you were right in publishing that letter before he came to his trud ? I was right in
stating my opinion in answer to the comments that have been made On my evidence. —
Had any complaints been made by the prisoner ? Not by the prisoner, but his attorney ;
he has written to every paper that Dr. Taylor was inaccurate : I had no wish or motive
in it; my duty concerns the lives of all, as well as the prisoner. — ^Do you know a Mr,
Augustus May hew, tiie proprietor of tke * Illustrated Times * ? I saw him once or
twice. — Did you allow a picture of yourself and Dr. Rees to be taken for the purpose of
pnblication in his paper ? K you will be so good as to call it a caricature^ I did not. —
There is a differ^ioe of opinion about that ; it seems to me as like as two peas : did you
allow that picture to be taken of you and Dr. Rees ? I never knew it was taken, that is my
answer ; until it appeared in the^,* Illustrated Times ' I did not even know that it was taken^
or that I should be caricatured. — Did you receive him at your house ? He came to me
▼ith a letter from Professor Faraday. — Did you receive him in your laboratory when
you were experimenting with Dr. Rees ? It is untrue, I did not. — Did you receive him
in your laboratory ? I did not, it is wholly untrue. — Did you never see him in your labo-
ratory ? INeTer. — Did you see him at your house after dinner ? He called on me-with a
letter from Professor Faraday. — Did you see him ? I did. — Did you know that he called
on you for the purpose of affording him infijrmation for an article in his * Illustrated Times ' ?
I did not, solenmly ; it is the most disgraceful thing I ever knew as a publication.— Did you
know him before ? I never saw him before. — ^Did you know that he was the Editor of the
* Illustrated Times ' ? I did not. — ^You state on your oath ? On my oath I did not : it was
the greatest deception that was ever practised on a scientific man ; most disgraceful.---And
you are perfectly justified in stating that, if it is so ; I will ask you this question, it is due
to you that I should ask it : is it false that there was more than one called^on you ? There
were two the first time. — I have it, " They candidly informed the doctor that they desired
to publish the particulars of their conversation with him, and requested his permission to
do so, and it was at once granted, they having undertaken to hold themselves responsible
fcrnot publishing any statement that might be prejudicial to the interests of justice"?
He called on me with a letter from Professor Faraday, and I received him as I would
Professor Faraday ; he entered into conversation with me about these cases, and mad6
a representation, as I understood, that he was connected with an insurance company, and
he wished to know the number of cases that occurred to me during a number of years :
after we had conversed about an hour, he then asked me if there was any objection to his
publishing this conversation : I said, as far as the letters were (K>ncemed, I had no objec-
tion, but I objected to anything else appearing: I did not know that he was the
editor of a journal : I said, I have no objection to anything appearing in answer
to what has already appeared, with the corrections of the different mistakes: he
went away without tellmgme that he was the editor of the paper. — ^And you did

K 2

148 TRIAL OF WILLIAM PALMER.

not know it, on your oath? On my oath, I did not; I did not know it till the article
was in print. — Did you remonstrate? I was shodced. — ^Did you remonstrate? Yes,
I did. — By letter? No, rerbally; he called on me with the article. — With your
caricature in it? No; the mere article set up in type, the slip. — Had the paper
been published ? No, it was the day before publication. — Did you not protest against
the publication? I did; I told him I objected to it. I struck out all that I saw
regarding these cases, and he afterwards put the article in the form in which it is. — You
allowed something to be published ? I could not help his publishing my conversation. —
You did permit him to publish part? Nothing connected with the Rugeley case. — Did
he show you the slip of * * Our interview with Dr. Alfred Taylor" ? I do not remember that
I saw that—Will you swear he did not ? I will swear to the best of my judgment and
belief he did not. — Will you swear he did not show you the slip of the article called
" Our interview with Dr. Alfred Taylor ?*' He showed me a slip, part of what appeared in
that article. — ^Did he not show you a slip as long as this, " Our interview with Dr. Alfred
Taylor** ? I do not beUeve he did.-— WiU you swear he did not? I wiU swear I do not
think he did : I struck out everything connected with the Rugeley cases ; I look upon
myself as cheated : a person had come with a letter from one of the highest authorities in
the country, and extracted from me the information^ — Why did you not desire your
servant to show him the door ? Until we had had all this conversation I did not know any-
thing about it.—- You allowed him to come back with the slip ? He came on the Thu^ay
morning ; and it was not 4ill then that I knew he was connected with a weekly paper. —
Did he tell you that it was the Illustrated Times? He told me as he was going away. —
Did you corqApt what he showed you ? I struck some out. — ^And allowed the rest to be
published ? 1 said I had nothing to do with that.— Did you object to it ? I objected to

protest as a gentleman and a man of honour that it was wrong and dishonourable to do it ?
I told him I objected to all the parts which concerned the Rugeley cases ; that it was most
dishonourable. — Did you protest against anything being published of that interview ?
No, I did not. — Did you not know perfectly well in this month of February, just
after the shock which the country had received about these Rugeley murders,
or imputations of murder, that your interview on the subject of poison must be taken to
apply to what was then full in the public mind? I did not know what it would apply
to. — Did you not think so ? No, I did not think anything about it ; I thought it was a
great cheat to extract from me any information and to publish it. — ^Wliat time was it he
called on you with the slip ? On the morning of Thursday, the day before publication,
— How long was he with you ? Not above twenty minutes or half an hour. — ^Were you
angry with him ? I remonstrated with him ; I was not angry in the sense of the word
quarrelling. — Angry in the sense of being indignant ? I told him I objected to that
mode of dealing with the case. — Did you allow him to publish this : " Dr. Taylor re-
<iuested us to st4»te that, although the practice of secret poisoning appeared to be on the
inci-ease, it should be remembered that on analysis the chemist could almost always
detect the presence of poison in the body" ? I did not dictate anything of the kind. —
Was that on the slip that he showed you ? If I had seen it I should have struck it out.
— You will not say it was not there ? I looked it over and struck out everything I saw
connected with the Bugeley cases, and he went away ; I felt that I had been imposed upon.
— Did you strike out this, " and that, when analysis failed, as in cases where small doses of
strychnia had been administered, physiology and pathology will invariably suffice to show
the cause of death '*? I remember seeing that. — ^Did you not know that it might circulate
most extensively amongst the persons from whom the jury to try the case mi^ht be
selected ? 1 did not think of the matter at all ; I think it is very proper information to
give, so that the public should be aware that chemical analyses are not the only things to
prove it. — ^Did you not think it was time enough after the man was tried for crimes such
as these ? — I think it was a gross imposition upon me. — You allowed this passage to passr
Only that they dressed it up afterwards. — '* Being detected as readily as murder in any
other form " ? No, I do not remember that. — ** While the difficulty of detecting and
convicting the murderer was fallacious in other cases where poison had been employed"?
That I do not remember ; the aiticle was very much altered, I could see that ; it was a
disgraceful thing. — Have you seen the gentleman since ? 1 have not seen him since ; I
wrote him a letter concerning the matter ; I complained of it.

The Attorney-General, — Have you a copy of that letter? T can state to you the sub-
stance of it; I saw an advertisement in the 'Times' paper which represented me as
giving this information, and directly I saw it I wrote to contradict it, and they with-
drew the advertisement. — ^What advertisement ? Some advertisement connected with the
v«rv number you are alluding to.

FIFTH DAY, May 19, 1856. 149

Mr. Justice Cressweix. — It was an adTertisement in the * Times * newspaper with
regard to this information? — I immediately desired that to he withdrawn, and I received
a letter from Mr. Mayhew to say that it should be.

Mr. Serjeant Shee. — ^How long after the publication of this ? Inttaediately ; directly
I saw the advertisement. — When did the advertisement appear ; the date of this paper is
the 2nd of February? I think it was on the Thursday or Friday, I am not sure which ;
it was to induce people to purchase the number. — ^Did you say to a gentleman of the name
of Cooke Evans that you would give them strychnia enough before you had done with
them ? No. — Or words to that effect ? No ; I do not know him. — ^Did you say it to any-
body ? No ; that I would give them a dose of strychnia before I had done with them ;
1 have never said anything so vulgar that I know of, never to my knowledge ; give who
a dose of strychnia? — I mean in reference to William Palmer? You have been greatly
misinstmcted. — ^I ask no question but upon instructions ? — You have been greatly mis-
instructed. — You deny that? I deny that. — Or an^ words to that effect? Or any
words to that effect ; I have not at all talked about giving anybody doses of strychnia.
—Or these words, " He will have strychnia enough before I have done with him " ?
It is utterly false, and the person who has suggested that to you has been guilty of
other false statements ; his letter to Sir George Grey misrepresented my statements
altogether. — I only speak from my instructions? I do not charge you with anything,
but you are misinstmcted. — If I knew it I would not put the question to you ; you made
a medical report to which you referred when we were talking about the first letter ?
Yes. — ^What did you do with that medical report ? The medical report was handed to
Dr. Rees ; he took possession of it, — Did you not get a report drawn up by the medical
gentleman who made the post-mortem examination ? No. — Was it not produced from
your hands two days ago in court ? You |ire under a mistake about it j it was a private
letter, not signed, from Dr. Harland to Mr. Stevens. — Was it in the shape of a medical
report ? It was a statement of the results of the post-mortem for Mr. Stevens's private
information. — ^Then it has been inaccurately called a medical report in the course of
this trial ? Yes ; it is merely Dr. Harland's statement of the examination for the infor-
mation of Mr. Stevens. — It has been read here as a formal medical report ? Yes ; I
believe that it has no signature.

^Mr. Serjeant Shee, — My Lord will recollect he required it to be read; it was repre-
sented as a medical report; (<o the witness) you have had it ever since? Yes. — I undel:-
stand you distinctly to say that as respects the effect of strychnia on the human body
you have no knowledge of your own at all ? I have not seen a case ; I have some know-
ledge. — I guard myself ; by knowledge of your own I mean personal observation r but
you have written a book upon the subject ? Yes. — Now do you, from your reading,
know of any case in which the patient under strychnia poison, any fatal case, has had,
\rhile the paroxysm lasted, as much command over the muscles of animal life and volun-
tary' motion as Mr. Cook had on the Monday and Tuesday nights according to the
evidence of Mills and Jones? I do not see that he had much command over the muscles
of voluntary life. — ^You mean to say you do not know cases ? I mean to say his sym-
ptoms are quite in accordance with the ordinary action of strychnia. — Can you tell me a
single case, either in your book or in any authentic medical work, of a patient seized
"""ith tetanic symptoms by strychnia poison sitting up in his bed talking ? He was seized
with the tetanic symptoms after he sat up in his bed. — Do you know of any instance in
"v^hich a patient has been beating with both his arms the bed-clothes under the influence
of strychnia poison within a short time, a quarter of an hour, before his death? The
symptoms generally came* on with some sort of action.

The Attorney-General. — You are assuming the fact; that was on the Monday night?
It is manifested in various ways.

Mr. Serjeant Shee. — Can you refer me to any case in your book, or ar^ authorized
book, in which a person under the influence of strychnia poison has been beating the
bed with his or her arms? It is exactly what i should expect from, the sense of
suffocation. — You say it is exactly what you should expect ; your experience is in rab-
bits, and the first symptoms you have seen is a sudden fall on the side ? You asked nxfi
the question with reference to my reading and knowledge. — I asked you if you could
refer me to any case ? I am quite willing not to answer, except as to rabbits ; I thought
you^ask^ me as to any case. — And so I cud ? The beating of the bed with the arms, in
the way you desci'ibe, merely indicates that, he) was very iineasy, that he feU oppression,
and it was an attempt at relief before the tetanic symptoms set in ; there was a feeling
of suffocation. — First answer my question ; do you Know of a single case, either in your
book or in your general reading, of the symptoms of poison by sti*ychnia commencing
or exhibiting themselves during any time of the paroxysm by the operation of beating

150 TRIAL OF WILLIAM PALMER.

the bed ? There haye been only aboat 15 cases altogether ; I harve not heard of a person
taken ill in bed before. — Now, is not the beating of the bed well known under the name
of malasanz ; is it not a verj common symptom of ordiaavy convnlsions ? Ho, I do not
think it is the case, not to my knowledge. — ^Ton know the term malasanx, which means
beating of the bed ? Yes.

The AUomey'General. — ^It means beating of anything? That does not terminate in
tetanus.

Mr. Serjeant 8hee. — ^That is not the question ; is it not a common form, as you know
by your reading, of violent conmlsions not occasioned by strychnia poison ? Persons
who suffer from suffocation, whether it depends on strychnia or other causes. — Then I
am right in understanding you that yon do not know a single case of strychnia poison in
which that has occurred ? I haye heard of one case that has been conmiunicated to me
by a friend. — ^We will have that when he comes ? It was in a private letter which came
to me. — ^That person can come and state them.

The Attorney-General, — You have no right to ask the question as to his reading at
all ; you must acknowledge it whether reading from a book, or a oommunication from
a scientific friend*

Mr. Serjeant Shee, — ^I have a right to ask a medical witness as to his knowledge ac-
qnired by reading and study.

Lord Caxpbeli.. — I think he may answer, that teom a scientific person he has re-
ceived an account of aome case.

Mr. Serjeant Shee. — ^You say you have heard of a case, not a published case ? It is

not a pubhsfaed case: the person did not sit up, but he shook as if he had an ague-fit

before the symptoms came on ,* that was all ; agitation. — ^Would you call that maliadon

or beating? No, 1 should not give it so learned a name. — You would call it beating?

Quaking, shaking ; the agitation is expressed in different ways. — I was asking you as to

beating? I have not a case of a person sitting up in bed and beating the bed. — ^That is

the fkir answer: have you known many instances in which the patient has screamed

before he was seized with the fit ? No. — Is that common in convulsions not occasioned

by strychnia poison ? It is ; in many cases they scream verysoon after the spasm sets

in, wben the spasm begins ; the pain felt is very severe.— This is before they begin?

No, I have not known that. — Have you known cases in which they speak freely? Yes.

-*<3an you refer to any case of that kind after the paroxysm has commenced? No, not

after the paroxysm has commenced ; I do not remember one at the present time.— Do

you agree, as far as your reading enables you to do so, with this description of strychnia

in Dr. Watson's book ; it is a case in Middlesex Hospital : " Unluckily, through mistake

or negligence of the person who was at that time the dispenser, a grain of the poison was

administered :". can you tell me or refer me to any one case in your book or else where,

any authentic writer, in which^the effect of the strychnia affection or paroxysm in a fetal

case has been as long after the ingestion of the poison as in Cook's case on Tuesday

ni^t? Yes.--A fatal ease ; I do not mean a slight case ? Yes, in pa^e 165 of the

* Medical Jurisprudence.' — ^I was speaking of your £>ok on Poisons?

The Attorney-General, — ^Read it ? In a case communicated to * The Lancet,' of August
31, 1850, page 259, by Mr. Bennett, one grain and a half of strychnia, taken by mistake,
destroyed the life of a healthy young female in an hour and a half, which is remarkable,
as no symptoms appeared for an hour.

Mr. Serjeant Shee, — May I take it that is the longest period which has elapsed
between the ingestion of the poison and the commencement of the symptonos on
record ? No ; I think not. — ^Does it appear how that was taken ? I think it was in
pills ; but I have * The Lancet ' here to refer to, if you wish. — ^That is a remarkable and
unusual case ? Yes ; it was certainly long, with r^u*d to the cases that had up to that
time occurred. — ^You know a case of an hour and a h3f ? There is one of two hours and
a half. — ^Was that a fetal case ? No ; but that does not affect it. — ^I am asking you as to
a fetal case ? I beg to say that the fetality of the case has nothing to do with the occor-
Yeaoe. — ^You will ^ve that opinion alWrwards ; we are informed that it has ; I am asking
you as to a fatal ease ? That "tras not a fatal case. — ^A grain and a half in that case is a
very considerable dose, is it not? It is a full dose^ not a very considerable dose. — It is a
dose from which a man is very likely to die ? Yes.— Now, Dr. Taylor, you gave a great
many cases in your book ; I do not want to take up much time in going into them, more
than is necessary for my client ; is there any one case in your book in which the atta<4
has taken place more than half an hour after the in^stion of the poison ? What book
are you referring to?— The book on Poisons. That is 8 years old. — ^Then you will cor-

* rect me by saying no, but there is in the other book ? Yes, I believe that is the case ;
cases have occurred since 1848 ; I have a reference to a case here of one grain and a half,

FIFTH DAY, Mat 19, 1856. 151

which is pnbli&hed by Dr. Chiistlson. — ^He is to be called ? The symptoms came on in
8 hours. — Was it fatal ? It was fatal. — ^That is a case in which the patient had been
affected with some complaint for 4 weeks, and began to take strychnia ; in 3 hours
there was stupor and loss of speech, and at length violent tetanic convulsions, which
proved &tal in 3 hours and 3 quarters ? Yes. — It does not tell you when it commenced ?
I take it from there. — Y'ou are mistaken as to that ? I do not think I am ; Dr. Christison
can give an account of it. — ^Do you know any other case ? Not a fatal case. — ^Is there
any case in your book on poisons in which the symptoms have been known to occur at a
longer period than half an hour from the ingestion of tlie poison ? You must not go
hack to the book of 1848. — t will go to your other book presently? In giving an
answer to your question, I am looking to what has occurred in the mean time. — ^If
you know of other cases from your reading, I cannot object to your stating them ; nobody
can silppose that you have personal knowledge of anything like what you have stated in
this booK : before you go further, do you know that Dr. Bradley, from whom Dr. Booth.
took the case» states that he cannot admit that the death was wholly attributable to the
dose of strychnia employed ? All those conditions are quite compatible with deatb from
strychnia. — ^You would not after that opinion say it was attributable solely to strychnia ?
No, but I should exercise my judgment, and consider strychnia had something to do with
It — ^Have you any other case, in your other reading, to which yon can refer ? No, yoa
asked me what the strychnia was taken in ; in that case it was dissolved, and one would
have expected a more speedy action; it is the more remarkable. — ^And had she an emetic
in that case ? The stomach-pump was used and a strong emetic — It was taken in some
solution ? Yes. — ^In what solution was it taken ? Cinnamon and water. — ^Do you know
a single case in which the symptoms have manifested themselves as long as an hour a^d a
half after the injestion of, the poison? No, I do not. — Now, can you refer me to aogr
authentic case of strychnia from which the patient has recovered from a paroxysm in ao
short a time as Mr. Cook recovered from the paroxysm on Monday night ? Within whut
time did he recover ? I do not understand that it was so short. — He was well the next
morning, and was well all the next morning ; it had no effect during the whole of tfae
next day, but he was comfortable and happy ? The recovery then will depend entirely on
the dose taken ; if he took the sixteenth of a grain he would recover sooner than from
an eighth. — ^Do you know any authentic case of strychnia poison in which the patient
has recovered from a paroxysm in as short a time as Mr. Cook did, he being well befose
the morning ? I do not remember any, but I can conceive in medical practice such cases.
—We want your experience in order to observe it ? It is nothing at all unusnaL — ^Honr
can you say that, when you do not know any case ? I say from my reading and experir
ence, a recovery after three or four hours will depend materially upon the dose, — ^Do yoa
Imow a single case in which it has taken place after strychnia poison has been adminiA-*
tered; look at page 265 of the Manual on Medical Jurisprudence, second edition ? Thie
convulsions gradually subsided about four hours after the first attack.

Lord Casipoell. — What case is it?

Mr. Serjeant Shee, — It is not strychnia, it is mix vomica, the same poison, but in a
nmch milder form ? Yes: — It is not the same as strychnia ? All its power depends on
the strychnia.

Mr. Serjeant SA«6.—- Only it is given in a very large dose.

Mr. Bason ALDEaBON.*—Tiiat was iialf an ifaaxce.

Mr. Serjeant Shee, — In this case the girl aged twenty swallowed half an ounce of the
powder, and in half an hour the usual tetanic symptoms came on, but she was peffectly
sensible. The convtdfifons gradually stibsided about four hours after the first attack.
Did you not learn from Mr. Cook's case that he was asleep befbre tiiree o'clock, and coni-
fortable during the whole of the next day ? Decidedly so.

Mr. Baron Alderson. — ^They said he was not asleep before a quarter before ^ve,

Mr. Serjeant Shee, — He appesured dozing, I believe; then he went to* sleep.

Lord Campbell. — According to theij^ account, he was awake at five.

Mr. Serjeant Shee, — Do you know any ot&er case in which, after an administration of
strychnia poison, the patient has recovered as soon as Mr. Cook did on Monday night ?
The difficultyis in settling the time of recovery ; that is not the ^int that medical men
eater into. — When the patient is no longer under the influence of it ? They do not give
the time generally, they merely put *' The patient recovered,** without any particular
statement as to the period of the^ttack. — Can you refer me to any case in which, after
the paroxysm from strychnia poison, the patient has remained composed and without the
repetition of the paroxysm in any degree, for so long a period as Mr. Cook did after the
paroxysm on Monday night ?

152 TRIAL OF WILLIAM PALMER.

The Attorney-Genial. — ^Without a fresh dose being given ? Yes ; I do not think the
attack on 'Aiesday night Tras the result of a dose given on Monday night.

Mr. Serjeant Shee. — That is not the point ; I ask you -whether you know of any case of
strychnia poison in which there was so long an intermission of tiie paroxysm as between
the two fits of Mondav and Tuesday night? No, I do not. — Is it the result of your
experience or reading that the person who dies from strychnia poison continues rigid iii
the attitude and position of lunb in which he dies ? I have seen that in animals, in
rabbits. — ^With your reading as to men, do they continue rigid in the attitude and
position of limb in which they die ? I do not remember the particulars : if a pers(m
dies in a spasm, the spasm is likely to continue : I know a case which can answer it ; it
was inspection after twenty hours* death, and the body was then very rigid ; there is no
account in these cases of how the body was at the moment of death. — ^The body was very
rigid in twenty-four hours, whatever sort of convulsion he died of? Yes; there is not
the slightest difficulty I think of finding such a case, but I cannot refer you to one now:
I found in one of the rabbits destroyed that the spasm continued after death. — ^As you
choose to go upon rabbits, do you not know that it constantly happens, even in rabbits,
that the spasm and the contraction instantly cease immediately with death, or just before
death, and that the body becomes perfectly pliant ? No ; I do not ; it does so in some
instances, in one out of five cases. — Do you agree in this opinion of Dr. Christison, "I
have not altered the statement as to this point in the former edition, that is, that the
rigidity supervenes at an early period after death ; yet I strongly suspect the others, who
describe the spasm which precedes death to continue as it were without the rigidity that
occurs after death, must have observed inaccurately, for, in the numerous experiments
that I have made and witnessed upon animals, flaccidity of limb continued after death"?
Dr. Christison speaks from his own experience, I speak from my own. — In some cases
in your own experience, two out of ten ? One case mat became rigid very soon after, as
Dr. Christison describes it.^ — Do you recollect enough of those that you killed twenty-five
years ago, as to know whether their limbs were stiff or fiaccid? No. — Do you mean to say four
of the five were actually stiff before or after death ? They remained stiff after death ; one
was quite flaccid, that was seen by Dr. Christison. — Did you see tha't in Dr. Bamford's
deposition, that he went to Mr. Cook as soon as he was called, arrived immediately after
he was dead, and found the body quite straight upon the bed ? Yes. — In your judgment
can that body be under the influence of opisthotonos? Yes; opisthotonos, the act of
dying. — ^That would be an instance of becoming flaccid? Yes. — ^Have you any reason to
say, from your experience or your reading, that the clenching of the hand is a
distinctive feature of strychnia poison ? It is the result of violent tetanic spasms. — Does
it not occur in other violent spasms? Yes. — In all forms of convulsion ? No ; the great
point is this, that in tetanus it remains so ; - in other convulsions it comes and goes.— Is
It always so ? That is according to my knowledge. — I think you stated that the heart
was generally full ? Yes.

Lord Cahpb£LI4. — He found the heart always full, particularly the right side, in the
rabbits.

Mr, Serjeant Shee^-^Do you mean actually to say that the colour tests of strychnia
are so uncertain and fallacious that they cannot be depended upon ? I do, unless you
first get strychnia in a viable and tangible foirm.< — Is it impossible to get that from the
stomach in all cases ? It is not impossible ; it depends on the q[uantity that remains in
the stomach. — ^You think it is in some cases impossible ? No ; I think, it is in some cases
impossible where the quantity is very small. — ^You do not agree that as much as the 50ih
part of a grain could be discovered ? I think not ; that is not separated. — Or even half
a grain ? That might be a difficulty ; it depends upon the amount of food in the
stomach with which it was mixed.

Re-examined -by the Attomey-General,

Now, in your reading about which my learned friend has been asking you, have you
met with cases in which it has appeared that the heart was found empty after death,
where the death had taken place from strychnia ? Yes. — ^Has that been in an animal or
in a human subject? In a human subject.— Do you find more than one such case?
Three. — What should you ascribe the emptiness of the heart to after such a death ? I
think it is owing to spasmodic affection, the effect upon the heart in the last moment of
life.— Is there any reason why that should be more likely to be the case in the human
subject than in a small animal" like a rabbit ? No ; I know of no distinction ; the only
thing I would observe is, that I think the heart is generally more affected by the
paroxysm, so that the blood accumulates. — Suppose the paroxysms short and violent, and
cause death in a few minutes? That is the kind of case in which I should expect to find
it empty. — With regard to the rigidity after death, did that rigidity after death in the

FIFTH DAT, Mat 19, 1856. 153

cases where you foand it, always affeet the same moscles? Yes; the mosclcs of the
limbs, specially the muscles of the back* — ^Where the rigidity was relaxed in death, do I
understand you to say that afterwards it returned? In the case of poisoning by
strychnia it returns while the body is warm ; in ordinary death it only appears when the
body is cold.

Lord Cahpbell. — ^The rigor mortis comes on after the body is cold, or nearly so.

The Attorney-General. — ^Would the rigidity of the extremities as long as two months
after death, the clenching of the hands, and the twisting of the feet, afford you any indi-
cation of whether the person died of tetanus ? I have never known such a case. —
Would that indicate, in your opinion, great violence of the spasm with which the party
died ? It would. — ^Would poison from strychnia, in your opinion, act with greater power
▼hen once the effect was set up, upon a person who had been lowered by a previous
disease ? I am not able to answer that.— Now, with regard to the duration of time in
which the effects of the poison would begin to act, to show itself, would it be uniform, do
yoa think, in all persons to whom the same quantity of poison might be given ? It would
depend on the violence and frequency of the spasms. — I am speaking of the commence-
ment; you have given us one case of half an hour, and another an hour; would the period
required to set up the action of the poison be uniform, or would it vary according to the
strength of the individual ? It would vary according to tiie constitution and the strength,
according to the power of absorption.

Lord Campbell. — There are various circumstances that will affect it.

The Attomej-General, — ^My friend asked you with regard to the symptoms which
appeared on the night of Monday, the beating with the hands and arms ; I think you
ascribed that to a sense of uneasiness ? General uneasiness, audi a' feeling of suffocation.
—According to your experience, is the feeling of suffocation one of the common symptoms
«rf death by strychnia ? It is one of the early symptoms. — Would that imeasiness produce
the effect m question ? It would. — Now, with regard to the detection of » the antimony,
you applied, as I understand you, no less than three tests to the examination that you
made? We separated the antimony, and then applied various tests. — ^Now, my friend
asked whether one or other of those processes would not be open to 4ifficulty, supposing
there were any impure substances used in the chemical process. Yes. — ^That might be so
▼ith regard to one of them ? Yes, it would. — Have you any doubt the substances you
^ised were pure ? None whatever, they were all tested on that occasion before I used
them. — ^Would that be at all likely to be the case with regard to three distinct processes ?
Certainly not. — ^Is it the fsjcX that three distinct processes give the same result, which
strongly corroborates 'the correctness of each? Yes; and Mr. Brande witnessed them. —
You have no doubt, if I understand you, that that which you produced was antimony ?
Not the least doubt at all. — If I understand you rightly, the quantity you found does not
enable you to form any judgment as to the quantity that may have been administered ?
Not at all ; that is to say, the residue ; a small dose, or the residue of large. — ^Supposing
that the antimony were given for the purpose of keeping up sickness, would the effect of
sickness be to throw off the greater part of that which was taken ? It would, to throw
off some portion. — My learned friend read to you two or three passages from a book on
poisoning dogs ; antimony in dogs, in which it got into the bones and tissues ; if you.
saturate the system with doses, it will get at last mto the.bones ?

Mr. Serjeant Shee, — ^This is rather too much in re-examination.

Lord Cabipbell. — It seems to me quite hai-mless.

Mr. Serjeant Skee, — I object to my friend suggesting a theory to his own witness.

The Attorney-General. — I will not press anything that you object to.

The Witness. — If antimony is given, it passes out with the urine, bat some of if passes
mto the body : if the antimony is not withdrawn, it goes into the tissues and bones : I
have not met with an instance yet, and all the cases quoted do not show Jhat, in which
there was antimony in the coating of the stomach and in the bowels.

The Attorney-General.' — Have you found none in thfe bones and tissues ? No ; we did
not analyze them. — You were asked whether you suggested any questions to the coroner,
aind you say you did ? Yes. — I must ask you how that came about ? The coroner did
not put questions which enabled me to form an opinion. — ^Did he appiear to you not to
put the necessary questions which he ought to have put under the circumstances ? I
think that it was not owing to any intentional omission ; it was rather his want of
xnowledge perhaps of the points. — You asked him to put thqse questions ? Yes.

Lord Campbell. — He was a legal gentleman, and not a medical. — ^He was ; he did not
understand the medical bearing of tiie question.

The Attorney- General. — ^Then you put some questions which either he put or the

154 TSUL OF WnXIAK PALMER.

witness aosvered ? Te^, I eould not hatre gma an opnion wiAoDt Aem. — ^TlMnigli jw
nj that it did not appear to yon that the oorooer omitted to pai anjc qneatiefi from an^^
intention not to diacharae his datj, did yon obserre that there ms an omissian to taka
down the answers ? I £d. — ^Did yoa anake any observation on that point ? No, I do not
remember that I did ; I got the information to give an opinion npon. — "Sow, at the time yoa
wrote that letter which my friend adverted to, to Mr. Gardiner, in which yon spoke of
antimouy as the possible cause of death, had yon then had the symptoms which attended
the attacks npon Mr. Cook, and which ended in his death, bronght to yoor knowledge?
No^ mere general informaticm ; I did not know at the time ; I merely haid the information
ahcmt seren days before he £ed, and that he died in oonvnlsions. — ^Yon did not know that
there had been conYulsions of a tetanic character ? Not at alL — ^Was there anything at
that time to lead you to snj^ose that strrchnia might have been die cause of death, except the
information yon received of Palmer's haTing boneht strychnia on the Tuesday ? There
was not : the information referred to pmssic acid aad opium ( that is all that I heard.-^
Failing to find whether pmssic acid, opium, or strychnia was there, you referred to
antimony as the cause oi death ? As the oidy substence found in the body. — On the
occasion of your writing that letter to the ' Lancet,' had yoa yourself been made the subject
of a great many attacks ? Tes, I had. — ^Have you becni misrepresented as to what yoa
have said upon the subject of the possibility or impossibility of detecting strychnia after
death ? I have. — ^In the '.Lancet* only ? In the newspiq)en in every character ; in fact,
in the letter to Sir George Grey written by Mr. Smith. — ^That was after it was suggested?
It was a repetition of the same thing. — ^Efnt before you wrote the letter to the ' Lancet/
in various newspapers had the subject been misrepi^esented ? Tes, in every direction:
It had been represented that I had said that strychnia eonld not be detected in a dead
body, that it was de steoy ed by pntrefiaction ; the question of putrefiiotion had never

Lord Cakfbell. — ^That it could not be detected in this particular case ? It was
Tepresented that I had said that strychnia could never be detected ; and the case wbicli
ire do not refer to by name has been quoted against me of how easily it could be detected
after death : what I said to the coroner was, that when absorbed into the blood it could
not be s^mrated ; if anything remains in the stomach more than enough to destroy lif<S)
of course it would be round. — Was it with a view to your own vindication from those
charges and misrepresentations that you wrote that letter ? Yes, I did.

I>r. GEOBGE OWEN REES sworn.— Examined by Mr. James.
You are a IPellow of the College of Physicians ? I am. — ^And Lecturer on Msterin
Medica at Guy's Hospital ? Yes. — Did you assist Professor Taylor in making the analyns
of Mr. Cook's stomach and intestines sent up ? I did. — ^Now, you have heard the descrip-
€on ^en by Dr. Taylor of the result of that analysis : has it been aeem*ately and correctly
given ? Very correctly. — ^Have you had your attention directed a good deal to the di»-
^very of poisons after death? I have at different times. — ^Now, tiie antimony tiiat yon
iHscovered, has Dr. Taylor eorrectly described the quantity and the place where the
itnlimony was discovered? Quite so: I was p r es e nt during the whole time. — ^Inyonr
jnd^ent, having directed your attention to the matter, how recently should you say that
hntimony might have been administered from what you discovered ; how recently before
death? It might have been administered within a few hours or a few days of his death.—
Do yon agree with Dr. Taylor that lyider the ciicumstanoes the quantity of antimony
you discovered was no test of the amoant that may have bean, administered ? Certainly
not — ^Now you £uled, having applied all the tests, to discover strychnia ? We did. — ^Was
the stomach presented to you in a state favourable or unfavourable to the discovery of
Strychnia poison ? — Most unfit vourable ; I opened the jar myself. — Just describe shortly
zbA accurately the state in which you found it ? The stomach had been cut open, and
turned inside out, its mucous surface lying and mhbing against the intestines ; the con-
tents of the stomach, had there been any at any time, must have been completely thrown
amongst the intestines and mixed. — ^Did that render it unfavourable to the hope of dis-
coveriujg: strychnia? Certainly. — ^Doyou agree with Dr. Tavlor as to the modestrychnia de-
stroys lite by absorption ? I bcdieve it is absorbed always berore it produces the symptoms.—
Now if by accident or design enough strychnia is given to destroy life, might that be the
«ase without your bcdng able to discover it after death ? Yes, I believe it might. — ^Yon agree
with Professor Taylor that it is the excess that you find ? ^ Quite sa — ^Where vitality is de-
stroyed by the effects of the poison, and an excess remains, you would expect to discover
that ? With care we might. — Have you seen those various experiments tried on animal
life, on rabbits ? I have seen several ; I saw the experiments that Ih*. Taylor made with
four of the rabbits.— Did you assist in the analysis made after the death of some of the
jiniTTr^aia to discover atrycmiia ? I did in all those cases. — ^How many cases were there

FIFTH DAT. BUT 19, 185e. 155

in whioh jOQ had admiiuBterad stiycluiBe and it destroyed the animals, in vhich joa
Med to disccMrer it after death ? We destroyed four animals, and &Ued to detect it in
three.---The symptoms you remarked; did they resemble the symptoms described as
atteodiog Af r. Cook's death ? Very much. — B&Ye yon yourself ever seen death in the
human subject from strychnia? I never have. — ^Have yon heard narrated the symp-
toms attending the death of Mre. Serseantsoa Smith from stryclmia ? I have. — And of
the girl in the hospital at Glasgow ? 1 have. — ^Aud that in the case which is anonymous ?
Yen ; all the cases that have been detailed here I have listened to. — ^Are they analogous,
in your opinion, to the symptoms attending Mr. Cook's death ? Clearly. — ^And analogous
to the experiments or symptoms you have seen produced from the experiments that
yoa made upon animal life ? Quite sa— From strychnia ? Yes.

Cross-examined by Mr. Grove,
How did you administer this strychnia to the animals; did you put it into the
month and let them swallow it ? No. — ^How was it done ? The animal was thrown on
its back, the legs secured by the hands of assistants, its mouth opened, and the pill intro-
duced into its month. — ^Did you see any instance of the animal rejecting some portion ; I
am told it sometimes occurs with rabbits that it has been lying in the stomach or in the
throat ? In the four cases that I saw, the pill was well taken. — ^You did not observe that
tiiere was any rejecting ? No ; but I must state that the fifUi casei, which I did not see,
i administered the pill in the fifth case, a small portion appeared to escape from the
rabbit's mouth ; I had to go to lecture. — On those three, where you say you failed, did
they include the two which Dr. Taylor said he recognised the taste in one and some
degree of colour in another ? Yes.

Lord Campbeix. — ^With regard to the finding it in the fifth he recollects nothing.

Mr. Orove. — I want to know whether those two cases were two of the three in which
you say you did not discover strychnia ? They were among the cases which I examined
with Dr. Taylor 5 Dr. Taylor stated so.

Lord Caupbeix. — ^Dr. Taylor distinctly stated that he performed them in the com-
pany of Dr. Bees.

Mr, Grove. — ^You have told us that you consider the poison must be absorbed ; do you
know that when absorbed it has been found in the blood and tissues ? I do not know of
any satisfactory experiment to that effect. — Do you know that Orfila has found it in matter
that has been putrefied for a long time ? I am not aware of it ; I do not think of neces-
sity that putrefaction would destroy it; it may. — ^In Mr. Cook's case putrefaction had
hardly set in ? We had the body approaching that condition, but there was no very
marked degree of decompo6ition.-*-The stomach I am speaking of? Yes, the stomach. —
Have you any facts with reference to strychnia on which to found your judgment with
reference to its acting as a poison by absorption ? No. — ^The colour tests, I believe, are
bichromate of potash, oxide of lead, and manganese? Used after the application of
sulphuric acid. — Are those flie recognised colour-tests ? Yes, they are. — Have you anjy
choice between those three, or do you consider them all equally good? In the expen-
ments I would prefer the use of strong sulphuric acid and bicnromate of potash. — My
friend asked you as to the quantity of antimony that you found ; if 1 understand rightly
from Dr. Taylor, it did not weigh any quantity at all ? No. — You only formed an opmion
from deposits in themselves so small as to be incapable of weighing ? Yes, by guesp.

Be-examiBed by ike AHomey^Oeniral,
The presence of antimony was clearly shown? Yes, dearly . — ^My fHend adced y<ra
whether you had any facts on which you founded your opinion that this poison acted by
means of absorption, or rather after having been absorbed ; on what do you found that
opinion? On the fact that absorption, generally speaking, is proved to be necessary in
the action of a great many mineral poisons, and also we have vegetable and animal
poisons ; we find that everything that increases the power of absorption increases the
activity of that poison when exhibited. — Would that be strengthened by the fact that
you found in some cases that, so far as you could discover, the whole had been absorbed
before the poison acted? It would be strengthened by that.

Professor WILLIAM THOMAS BRANDE sworn.— Exammed by Mr. Weishj,

I believe you are the professor of chemistry at the Royal Mint ? At the Royal Insti-
tution ; I am honorary professor at the Royal Institution. — ^Were you present at the ana-
lysis made by Dr. Taylor, of the Uver, spleen, and kidneys of the deceased Mr. Cook ?
No.^ — ^Which were you present at? I had a report from Dr. Taylor and Dr. Rees sent to
nie for my opinion upon it. — Were you not present at any actual analysis made by them ?
I was. — ^Be kind enough to tell us when and where ? ^t Guy's Hospital, on Saturday

156 TRIAL OF WILLIAM PALMER.

the 3rd Mayi — What was then done ; will you describe ? We then examined, in the first
place, the action of copper upon a very weak solution of antimony ; we foond that there
was no action until the solution was slightly acidified by muriatic acid and heated : the
antimony was then deposited. — ^Are you able to state positively that that deposit was
antimony ? Yes.

£)ross-examined by Mr. Grove,

Animals to which antimony had been given to your knowledge, not a portion of Jlr.
Cook's body ? The case that I have just alluded to was one of a solution of emetic
tartar made for the experiment.^ — In fact, this is a repetition of the experiment giTen
in the book as Rinche's test ? Yes. — I believe a great many metals, assumiijg that there
are other metals there, will be thrown down by the copper in the same way ? I only
know of three brought down in that way altogether : arsenic, antimony, and I believe
bismuth. — ^Will not mercury be precipitated in the same way ? Mercury will go down
into cold without the application of heat. — And also when boiled with heat j if you were
to plunge it into the hot liquid, it will also go down ? No doubt. — Lead and tin, will
they go down with heat in the same way ? Lead and tin will go down, I should thinks
in the cold also. — Do you speak with certainty upon that ? I do not. — You cannot
undertake to say whether lead and tin would require heat and then go down, would pre-
cipitate in the same way ? Yes. — Does not the effect arising from sulphur also fre-
quently produce a deposit very similar ? No. — Sulphuric hydrogen ? No ; they blacken
the copper. — ^What is the difference ? It is very manifest. — It is a difference to the ej^e ?
It is a difference to the eye, but the testing afterwards will at once of course distinguish
between the two.

Re-examined by the Attorney-General,

Were those tests which were applied by Dr. Taylor and Dr. Rees the proper tests to
ascertain the fact of antimony being there present ?i Certainly. — ^Have you no doubt of
the fact of antimony being there present ? None. — ^If I understand you rightly, Pro-
fessor Taylor first showed you some antimony which he alleged he had extracted from
the body, and then you afterwards saw an experiment made yourself upon some further
portion of the body ? No ; upon the antimony. — ^Yours was a collateral experiment
made upon what he so produced to you ? It was. — ^As I understand, what you did was
to try the accuracy of the test which Dr. Taylor had applied previously ? My object was
to make an experiment that would satisfy me as to that being a very excellent mode of
detecting antimony. — And did you satisfy yourself? I did.

Lord Campbell. — This being the mode adopted for detecting the antimony ? Yes.
Professor ROBERT CHRISTISON sworn.— Examined by the Attorney-General

You are a Fellow of the Royal College of Physicians ? Yes. — And Professor of Ma-
teria Medica to the University of Edinburgh ? Yes. — You have published a treatise on
poisons in relation to medical jurisprudence? Yes, I did in 1845. — ^Among other poisons
have you turned your attention to strychnia ? Yes. — How in your opinion does strychnia
act upon the human frame ? By absorption into the blood. — And then by acting on the
nervous system ? And then by acting on the nei'vous system. — Have you ever seen a case
of strychnia opon a human subjibt? Yes, but 'not fatally ; an over-dose taken medi-
cinally. — Have you seen experiments tried upon animals ? Frequently. — What sort of
animals ? Upon frogs, rabbits, cats, dogs, and one wild-boar. — ^When did you first direct
your attention to this poison? In 1820, iu Paris.- — ^Was it first made matter of observa*
tion by the French ? Yes ; it was discovered two years before that at Paris. — In those
experiments upon animals, what doses have you given generally ? In most of my expe-
riments very small doses, but sometimes as much as one grain.

Lord Campbell.— What do you call a small dose ? A sixth part of a grain.

The Attorney-General. — What is the smallest dose that you have found to kill a
rabbit ? As administered by the stomach ? — You have administered it by injecting? By
injecting into the cavity of the chest. — Have you never given it by the stomach ? Yes.
— What quantity have you found to take life away in that way? A sixth part of a grain
killed a dog in two minutes. — You have administered it occasionally through the stomach?
Yes. — What quantity have you so given ? I have seen a grain given ; I do not recollect
to have given more. — What sort of animal was that to? A rabbit. — ^Did the animal die?
Yes. — In how short a time ? That I cannot recollect at the present moment ; it is a long
time ago since I have made most of these experiments, but I have seen an experiment
made lately. — Upon what animal was that? A rabbit.

Lord Campbell. — When was that ? The other day, one of the experiments made by
Dr. Taylor.

The Attorney-General, — What did he give then ? I think it was about three-quarters

FIFTH DAY, May 19, 1856. 157

«

of a gnUDi and that killed it ; a very small quantity injected into the animal. — Passed down
into the stomach ? A very small quantity was not swallowed.

Lord Campbeix. — He gave about three-quarters of a grain ? Yes ; and a very small
quantity was not swallowed by the animal ; three-quarters of a grain is not a very large
quantity.— What became of the three-quarters ? Three-quarters was given, but a very
small quantity not swallowed.#

The Attomey^General, — Now, will you be so good as to tell us what are th^ symptoms
which you have found after the administering of this poison in animals? The first
s^ymptoms ?

Lord Campbell. — Are you speaking generally, now ? I speak of them all.

The Attorney- General. — Is there any particular difference between the cases of rabbits,
cats, and dogs ? Very little ; there is some difference, but there are differences between
individuals of the same species. — Be so good as to give us the general symptoms as com-
mon to all these animals ? The first symptom that I have observed has been a slight
tremor and unwillingness to move, then frequently the animal jerks its head back slightly,
and very soon after that all the symptoms of tetanus come on, which have been so often
described in the evidence of previous witnesses. — ^Is there occasionally an intermbsion of
the symptoms ? Yes, for a short while.

Lord Campbell. — An intermission of the spasm ? Yes.

The Attomey-Generai, — ^What time generally, from the conunencement of the symptoms
to the death, have you found elapse ? Where it is introduced into the stomach ? I presume
in other cases it is much more rapid. — Yes, where it has been introduced into the stomach?
Between 5 or 6 minutes and 25 minutes, before the animal is dead. — From the giving l^the
poison to the first symptoms coming on, what has been the usual average t;me ? I have
seen it as late as 12 minutes. — ^Before it begins to act? Before the appearance of .tremor.
—And then from the first commencement of the symptoms to their termination in death,
jou say from 5 or 6 to 20 minutes ? Fronv 5 or 6 minutes to 20 or 25 minutes.^-Have
the symptoms always been the same ? Very much. — I mean in respect to, first, certain
muscles being affected, and then other muscles being affected ; or does it vary in the
individual cases ? I think, where we can trace it very correctly, that the jaws and the
back of the neck are affected first. — ^What next ? And then the trunk and the extre-
mities. — Which first? In such rapidity that it is very difficult to follow them in
succession. — Now you mentioned that you had sometimes observed differences in
individuals of the same species ? Yes. — What had that reference to ? The inter-
mission sometimes is wanting. — ^You mean, that the first paroxysm ends in death?
Some lie in one long, continuous spasm, with scarcely any intermission, but that
is uncommon. — Have you generally found a remission of the symptoms immediately
before death or not? Commonly. — So that the animal has died quietly ? Yes; that is,
a state of flaccidity about the period of the termination of life. — What is the effect -of
that upon the rigidity of the muscles ? I have always observed an interval before the
rigidity that takes place after death. — ^I was coming to that in a minute ; you say that
there is a cessation of the symptoms immediately before death ? Yes. — ^What effect haa
that upon the rigidity of the muscles ? The rigidity is gone, the body is flaccid.— ^In suoh
cases, after death do you find the rigidity is renewed ? Very soon.^~Hav« you f^ond
that rigidity continue long after death or not? I have not attended to its duratiou*-*
Have you ever opened the bodies of animals that have been thus killed ? Frequently *r--
Have you found that the poison had produced any apparent effect upon the stomach or
intestines ? I never could see any effect which I could trace. — ^Have you ever found any
apparent effect on the spinal cord or braia ; any visible or apparent change ? None
which I can trace satisfactorily to the poison. — In what state have you generally found
the heart of an animal after death ? It generally contained blood. — ^Have you sometimes
found it devoid of blood ? Not in animals ; it has been found by others, but I have not.
—You said you had seen one case of the human subject? Yes; I have seen several,
where a mild over-action was produced, but in one a severe over-action was produced. —
What was the nature of that case ? The fixing of the jaw, spasmodic retraction of the
liead, slight grinning expression of the mouth, and a slight stiffness of the arms and
fingers. — Any convulsion of the muscles of the trunk ? No ; great alarm. — Any con-
vulsive movement of the arms and legs in that case ? No. — You have collected all the
eases that have occurred up to the time of the publication of your book as far as you are
aware ? Yes ; as far as I have discovered. — Should you expect to find that the poison
took a longer time in producing its effect upon the human subject than it would upon
animals ? It appears to require a longer time in the larger animals than the small. — In
proportion to the size of the animal ? Yes. — You mentioned having seen it given to a
^ild boar J was that injection? Yes; into the chest. — And I suppose the operation

158 TRIAL OF WILLIAM PALMER.

therefore was rapid ; how long was that anhnal dying ? Ten minutes, from the third of
a grain. — ^I'o come back to the human subject: what length of time, with the kno^v ledge
that you have derived from the cases that you have collected, does the poison operate upon
the human subject ? Do you mean operate to produce death, or begin to operate ?--B€gm
to operate ? I think there are cases where strychnia, in the shape of nux vomica, has
not operated for about an hour. — ^But given in the shape of'strychnia ? The time seems
in general shorter dian nux vomica^ but that all d^iends upon the mode in which it is
giyen. — ^In the generality of cases which are reported in the books has it been taken or
given in the solid or fluid form ? Generally the solid form ; sometimes in the flnid. —
And it will make a difEeience whether it is in the one or the other with respect to
the length of time Aat will be required? There is a want of precise information
as to the materials in which the poison is given, and that often sigidfies materially.-^
Do you ^mean the material with which it is mixed up ? Yes ; suppose it was ^ven in
the shape of a pill, much might depend upon the material used for making the pill.—
Might it be mixed up with materials which would protract the period at which the
symptoms would make their appearance ? Certainly. — Now what sort of materials might
it be mixed up with so as to make the appearance of the first symptoms as late as possible
after the administering of the dose? Kesinous materials are all difficult of digestion. —
Would such materials be within the knowledge and reach of a medical man? Yes,
some are often used for making ordinary pills. — ^When would absorption first begin ? As
soon as the pill came to be broken up or digested. — ^Bnt not before? But not before. —
The less soluble the pill the longer would be the period required? Yes. — ^Now, inde-
pendently of that, does the state of knowledge upon this subject enable you to predicate
with anything like certainty or accuracy the period that would be required in the human
subject before soidi poison would begin to operate after it has been taken into the
stomach ; does the state of science enable yon to form an opinion as to the precise time,
or nearly the pre<nse time, that it would require for this poison to begin to operate? I
do not think we can fix, fh>m our present knowledge, the precise time for the poison
beginning to operate. — I presume, when you ^ive it to an animal for the purpose of
wiatching the eflieet of the poison, you give it m a manner in which it should act most
readily, whether in the fluid or the solid form ; you did nothing to retard its operation?
We use the same form ; we take care that the anmial is fasting, and have every circnm-
stance favourable for the action of poison. — Do you mix it up with materials that can
be readily soluble in the stomach? Yes. — Have you ever seen any cases of tetanus
of the natural kind? Yes. — ^Arisin^ from disease, or fVom wound? Arising from
both. — How many instances ? I cannot say; I have seen a good many arising 'from
W4>nnd8, bat very few from natural disease. — Is there, in your opinion, any marked
difference between what I may call natural tetanus and the tetanus of strychnia?
I woiUd not rest much upon the little difference of particular symptoms, but rather npon
the course and the general circumstances attending them. — What is the difference in
respect of the course of the symptoms ? Firsts that in all the natural forms of tetanns,
the symptoms begin and advance much more slowly ; and secondly, they prove fetal
iBoch more slowly. — ^When once set up, do you find in the natural tetanus any complete
intermission? No, at least in certain forms of natural tetanus there is no intermission.—-
Where the first paroxysm does not prove fatal, are there occasional intermissions in
tetanus from strychnia ? Short intermissions. — Now, did you hear the evidence ^ven by
MiEabeth Mills of what took place on the Monday, and by Mr. Jones of what took
place on the Tuesday night, when Mr. Cook died ? I did. — ^Now, referring to your ex-
. perienee, both by personal observation and by study of the two classes of tetanus, to wluch
should you refer the spasm and other symptoms spoken to by those two witnesses ? To
strychnia, or one of the natural pdisons containing it. — Such as nux vomica ? There are
four kinds of poisons, differing from que another, which contain it. — What are those four?
Nux vomica, St. Ignatius's bean, snake-wood, and a draught poison called exhetwick ; they
b^ong to differ^it plants of the same genus.

Lord Campbell. — From all of which strychnia may be obtained ? From all of which
strychnia may be obtained.

The Attorney-General. — ^Is there any natural disease to which you can refer these
symptoms whieh you have heard described ? None that I have ever seen or that I other-
wise know. — ^Now, one thing with regard to animals and also to the human subject; when
death takes place from tetanus or tetanic convulsions, does consciousness continue, or is
it in any way overcome ? As long as one can make an obser\'ation upon it it remains.-^
You mean until the vital power is passing away, ebbing away with life ? When the
animal is in a state of strong universal spasm, it is impossible to make any observation on
tit consciousness. — ^You say that in the qnimftlg that you have thus killed or seen kili^
hse heart remains with blood in it ? Yes. — Is that sdso so with the human subject ? No.

FIFTH DAY, May 19, 1856. 159

—Does it yzry in tlie human gnbject ? Yes. — ^Te ^1184; do you ascribe the fact that it
sometimes is found with blood in it, and sometimes it is empty of blood ? To the par*-
ticular mode of death, as the dose varyinjg. — What mode of death would haTC the effect of
emptying the heart ? It is evident that in some instances, as in that case, that toc^ place
by spasms of the heart. ^

Lord Campbell. — ^The spasm expels the blood ? Yes.

The Attorney -General. — With regard to the finding of strychnia after death, where the
death has taken place from strychnia, should you expect to find it or not ? Not where*
the quantity is small. — Bat where there is an excess over the quantity necessary to
destroy life by absorption, should you expect to find it or not? If the excess is con-
siderable. — Have you formed any opinion as to the sufficiency of the colouring tests ?
Yes, I think they are uncertain in some respects. — ^Are vegetable poisons generafiy more
difficult to detect ? They are. — Are there some indeed for which there are no tests known ?
There is one I know for which there is no test that I know of. — Did you see the stomach
that was sent to Dr. Taylor to operate upon ? No. — ^You heard the description that he
gave of it to-day ? Yes. — ^What should you have said was the chance of finding strychnia
there, even if there had been any left in the stomach ? It was in a very unsatisfactory
condition as given in evidence. — If you were called upon to analyse such a stomach as
he has described, should you have entertained any reasonable expectation of doing
any good with it ? None, if I had not been informed that there was a considerable
(piantity of strychnia present. — ^You mean it would be necessary that there should be a
considerable quantity of strychnia in the stomach beforehand in order to find it under
the circumstances of which we have spoken ? Yes. — ^You heard the evidence as to these
other cases, the Leeds case, the Glasgow case, and the Romsey case ? Yes. — ^Have you
any doubt those were deaths by strychnia ? They were deaths by strychnia, I have no
doubt. — ^Do the symptoms of Mr. Cook appear to you to have been similar symptoms or
not to those yon have heard there described ? Very similar.

Cross-examined by Mr. Grove,

I understand you that the experiments all but one that you made were made by yon
many years ago ? Yes. — ^Were Uiose experiments excluding the one before the colour-
tests were known ?-:— Yes ; I do not think that I have made any observations upon my
having experimented much upon the tests ; none of the experiments that I made long
ago had any reference to the tests. — Have you made any experiments •with the colour-
tests upon aaimals killed by strychnia ? I have made an experiment in the case of a
man poisoned by strychnia, and I failed to find strychnia by one of the tests.

Lord Campbell. — ^We ought to know more about this case of the man poisoned by
strychnia,

Mr. Grove. — Is that the only one in which you made an experiment of a colour test, a
man or an animal ? Yes.

Lord Campbell.'— When did that occur? In 1851.

Mr. Grove, — ^What was the test that you employed in that instance ? The develop-
ment of a violet-colour by mesiis of sulphuric acid and oxide of lead ; I have not tried
the hichromate of potash. — You did not try that? Not in that case. — Nor the mangau-
nese? No. — ^And^no experiments with animals with those tests ? No.

Lord Campbell. — ^You had better go into that case. It was a gamekeeper who was
fonnd dead. — Are you speaking of your own knowledge ? I did not see the man ; the
case was put before me.

The Attorney-General, — You did not see the man die ? He was found dead.

Mr. Grove, — Did you see the administration of strychhia to him ? He was found dead
upon the moors. — ^You know nothing of the circumstances before that of your own know-
ledge? Certainly not; the case was investigated and the particulars submitted to me. —
Is this reported in the medical books ? It is reported by the medical gentleman who con-
sulted me upon the matter.— W^here ? Jn the Monthly Medical Joui^ial of September,
1851.

Lord Campbell. — Is it your opinion that animals who die of strychnia die of suffo-
cation, asphyxia? From my own observation I should say so; but you will, in another
part of my work to which you refer, find that I leave the question open.— What do jou
'^ish us to understand by asphyxia ? Stopping of the respiration ; the meaning of it ia
stoppage of the pulse, but it no longer means that in medical language.

Mr. Grooe, — ^Where is it ? It is under the head of Nux vomica, at the bottom of pag^
S98. — ^I do not find that meets the question ? It leaves the question open ; it takes plac^
there in &a influence on the heart sometimes, and through an influence on the

160 TRIAL OF WaLlAM PALMER.

respiration ; it is now more open, partjcnlarly fr6iJi*Hie xsMk ^^^k htre oesnted tofi^
death from strychnia. — The state of th« heart irbioh you mdntldn tlitw "##^4 -}»
consistent* with death by asphyxfci? Not with Mood in the iMe'oT th«.htt«t'.— Yw
mention the feet that one was found with the heart dfet^ded with arteiiiKbkwd?* i
think it is a fair inference, and I leave the question open in Itett pts«a^;vl quote'
experiments different from these. — ^There is fl case wller* the ha»xi iBdi»tanded.rrith
arterial blood ? It must have taken place from an ftfiTeclkm of the' heart^—I 'Ujaderitaiid
you to state that you do not put that as an kifercnoe in yourbodk? it k.vtt> loc
understood that that was addressed to medical m«i, and tb^y^Wdwi^esrplBttd it by
that statement; I would "beg to Wal1o%Wtd«id, tJfet 13 jtArn have eiafscd wncethe
publication of that book, and a great deal of infoi-mation has befeii iicqmwdJiqOiLthe
subject since. — I was going to ask you't qiiestioiL nptfft &t«|| jhi liiduabithei^ iftsfM^lctoge
of opinion : you will tell me if they ve cfigffct c J[ji,tl^. J^jimft^ pQison^ by. ^tiyclj^iie
that you examined, w^s there bjioiod uk ^^u; ri^ht cavity ?^ yes, in both.-r-Now \yu i^te
in your book, and you tell me, iliat.wTjeA 5eatb dfoes n.qt take place sudpeniv^ f:aa m of
spasms, the persou con^n^^^o.Be afie^ted'.fpr p or 14 hours, with,8mMl o]: Mfler
paroxysms ; is that, ^ s^tement which, aec9rding to your su'bsequent KaoVl'eog^j is
correct, that it continues to ,"^6 gifecfed? Ijipie man to whom reference was jnade a
short time aeOv wji^m J saw-f-j — ' Be Itind enough to direct your attention to my
question first}'* have read tiie genefi-al classification of the effects of the poison? 'Tes,
it is, as we were icquain^d witn the effects at that time. — ^And siibsequently as "W the
general classifications;' 1 'am not asking any special case, as I read it, 12 or 15 hbwrsj I
do not meap to tie" yoii dfowii ? ' I ^av'e known the effects cease in a shorter tinie.— Yon'
state at pa^e §03^ '/aftei' 'mentioning a case where the body was rigid, "The state of
rijgldityj noweyi^i*, does not invari£3)ly occur; on the contrary, in animals the limbs
become v^ry" '6acci(i frtimediately after death, but the usual rigidity supervenes at a«
early period/* ^presume the rigidity of which you speak there is 'the rigidity of
deatb, the rigor mortis ? ' Yes. — ^You have a note : — " I have not altered the state-
ment' as to tliis )^b'mt in a former edition, yet I strongly suspect that author
that describes the spasms which produce death, and which continues the rigidity
after death, must be inaccurate ;" is that . your present opinion ? I think it is very
likely, the interval being very short, that the attention may be attracted to the feet of
there having been an interval of ,flaccidity. — I presume you do adhere to that opinion ex-
pressed in that ngte ? There have been some cases mentioned, very strong indications
certainly of the spasm having continued from the spasm of life to what we call the spasm
of death ; but I stiUL think .th^ differences which are indicated in different cases may be
explained on the supposition that there has been a want of minute and accurate attention;
I think it right to state, that in all investigations as to the action of these poisons, very
close observation is necessary in order to appreciate them. — Now, you mention a case ai
page 906, where yoiu say A boy, when he was toudied, was ipp^iate^y thrown into a
|irt(iifi,it ^your. present impression, in cases of poison by strychnia, that there is a tendency
icj^t^^-OH^ the patient into a fit when touched ? That is the only one; in animals it is
fs^ejcy. ;^^m;^kabie, itis iiot noticed in the generality of cases.^^We iave heard cases "where
j^lj wa^^jxcJQuliar ; there is a case in Br. Watson's book, in \i^hich it is also mentioned ?
T^fife.is no/4ottbt about that ; I have been struck with observing that it has not been so
piteiaj^te4.^^It is m)t that the absence of it is noted, but that it Is not mentioned at all?
jy^.!^ npt me^jpned at all, — ^In animals, have you invariably obs'erved it ? Yes ; unless
^i<^toupJi liem yery gently indeed.— rl be^iqye the. bitter taste is. vety remarkable of

Jtrj^cWft^a? ^Voff strong and enduring.— A, erai'n' in 8rt,oOO' gallons, will make it taste
i^^f ^ ^,}t h ^i.d.;^ I.have not myself tned the intensity o^ the taste ; that is upon the
.^nljl^^ptj^ oif a French, geutleman who discove red jhe poison; it is not my own observa-
tion. — You 'stated thait care was taken, in administering it to ainimals, tb administer it to

■ > i

fasting • fla you- think it not likely it WQuld supervene more quickly if adminis-
f4cK ifci'aiiTifitity^stotiikch ? ''te'rtaifaly^; f^feted iUi we^lobk' ]paiM to adhiinister it to
n healthy .animal and to an empty stomach. — Now, if resinous substances were used fl»
'h'pii!,*^MW(i«H^ i6tnbe'^1iftriiftl<9'fetfomSl45rtW«toal^6i^ arftemards. No, if they were
not at^ed ii^n;ihey laHgftt'pfes Into t&<r>ifitdKtlia(9^Jt-«Aird%eH!aanied off you mean, is not
Iftit soj'thfe ffi^-wWd be fb«ift>iA*^e^'ilrteribfaes?*i-¥es; if not discharged.— Then the
•«trychn}kwfeifld«b^aiAai«t%^%i*1*«d5->rouMI[itno«? 'Certainiy, or gradually acted
uponM^ually wi«»-<h*'i«e^ft6u«'st*lr«i>^W; «feiMottg'«trt)8tanbes undergo solution in time
in the ihtfestiAes^^— 1 iiuppttie; lf1!WY«si»toB'ftibirttoce prevented the poison acting rapidly,
it would prevent Its ftl»orJ)tk«i'intoilie^bl<>odJf l^iif -a tinie;" — If so, the more likely to
leave ponidns of it in 1^ #tMhach of- ifiti«iiitie9,-«id tiie4sa»e may be ? The more likely.

Re-examined by the Attorney- General.
Would that materially depend on the quantity of the dose ? Both on the dose and

aSKTH DAT, Mat flO« 1856* 161

o» til* tintiMii^ YiMi A* pV i9M^.9Ui^ ta J9n«J^

guiefceeMT it nported ? Tet.— By a medical gentleman who called in' your awistanoe ?
Yes.<^TVW ara Uui flieti of it ? irhare do you say it is to be found ? In the ' Monthly
Journal af M«die«l SciMiee/ of September, 185U— What are the facts? A gamekeeper
wu fbosd dflid after bang 4 days missing^ and the head of the body was thrown back,
and the hands eleachedy and the muscles rigid ; a paper of strychnia was found in his
pocket, and I fooad in ^e contents of the stomach indications of strychnia sufficient to
satisfy me milder these circnmstaoces as to the probable cause of death : by a process
like thai caployod by Dr.T^lor I obtai ne d an extract stronsly and enduringly bitter,
and which baeame yellow by nitric aoid, but it ^ if(»t give tae indication of the other
colour-t^ftM BieatioDcd.

Mr. Baitoir AUnmtov.-^Th^ 'violet colour ? Yes.

Mr. &r(nfe,r-ThAt is the otide of lead ? Yes.

Mr. Baaoir Ai^dehbov. — ^How did you ascertain that there was strychnia in the
stoauoh ? The gentleman who examined the case on the spot ascettained that there
ma stTTchnia. — ^What was his test t I do not recollect at the moment, but I was quite
satisfied with his account of his method of investigation at the time : it is a very easy
matter to detect strychnia when it is found in a state of purity.

The Aitom9y'Qeneral, — He had it in his pocket, as I understand ? Yel ; he was in
thspiactioe of using it for killing Termin,-~Witk regard to the colour-tests generally,
you hava sdrtady, I tblnk, expr^ed an opinion P I haye nothing ftirther to say upon
tkaihead : it appears that colo«r*tests are not to be relied upon in the case of strychnia
ia aa impvra aoadition: in the firat place, yon may not find iodications of strychnia,
and, secondly, they are subject to fallacy even . if the strychnia ia pure. — From what
csBsc ? From other iubstances not containing strychnia presenting similar appearances.
-^•What are those substances that mia hi present the same appearance ? The substances
mentioned by I>r. Taylor : I should add that I was not aware of the analysis until
pointed oat to me by Dr» Taylor and exhibited.— You saw the results produced by him ?

• A^own$4 to U'-momyio at 10 o*clock.

SIXTH DAT^S TEIAL.

' Mat 20, 1856.

Dr. JOHN JACKSON awon.— Examined by Mr. Janut.
I believe you are a member of the College of Physicians ? I am.--Have you reeeatly
fetumed from India, where you have practised for many years? I have. — Howman^
years were you in practice in India? 25 years.— Have you had your attentioa directed
Coring that practice to oases of idiopathic tetanus P I have.*— And tromatic tetams ? In
the same way. — Now, is the disease cf idiopathie tetanus rare in this conntrjr? In Eqg-
Und it »p|ara to be rara.-— U it frequent in India? Comparatively with this country it
is very fr^uent ia India.— About how many cases of idiopathio tetanus have jon s^ed,
^0 you think, in the hospital at Calcutta ai^d in the course af your practice in India?
1*he pr<^)ortioa of cases of idii]|>athic tefanus ccmipared with tromatic is about one-third*
^But how many ^ases of idiopathio tetanus have come under your attention ? Not less
than 40 cases.— i)oes idiopathic tetanus gex^erally prove fhtid ?* It is equally as &tal fts
the tromatic

. Lord CAMPBBLli.— That is in Ipdia? Yes ; it is not fo considered, tut I hav? found
It so.

Mr. Jame9r—U it common with children? . V«xy fr^n«ntly it is found in children,
both native and European.^Fiom exposttrato.oWd ? It takes j^ce the third day after
oirtb ; it will also be occasioned by QQb^-*«^|i that climate? xm^^J^ ih^ syipptoips
similar t^ those of tromalic tetanaa? Ia chUdreOi in in^snt^ there is a more marked
^mptom of lock-jaw { in adults there is bo diffimance in tha iQrmptpms of tromatic/—
mw in that disease, especially idiopathic^ wlukh I am directing yonr attejutiou to, ia that
pr^eded or not by premoniiory symptoms? I have. always seen it preceded by pre-
monitory syzaptoms.>*-What premopitory n]»pt«ma ? The pre«)oaitoiv aymptoms are a
))eca]i«r expression of the ^ountenaafie, stiffness m the muscles of the throat and of the
^▼•--Kov wl^tt is th^ iwil {eriod from the attack to death, where it proves f&tal, in

L

162 TKUuuoiKWiaaxw^4P#w.

kill in 48 hoars. ' • . • *.,•',.'■?£ obfffl I bit.

Lord CAMPBt3X.-^l8 tbM the unal cantfae? .'T<8, 48^oiirrf: in ^aMli, aiUngifinoir
cold, it is of longer dunAioni and miy.cbntBtne Muniy -da^ y iagt Uii i w ii^h jAe: ^dbc
grades as the tromatie Ibnn. - ■' • .^'^ f • . i > ••:.-•! -.di Us :ij;:.!»I

Mr. /a«n^5.-^3ave jod heatd Ui^eVldiNtc^' deUrMiBi^ Ihe tftMl&'^WidiXrZdobki (hi
deceased, had on the Monday ttiATkefcdIij'? rhfcttf. '^r ' -^ '-- ■— ;

Lord Campbeix. — Were you in ooart?,l'twakpot'm <^iui. ' ' *A i

Cross-exammed DT Mr, ^^^«in(( iSm(: . ,1 ^^r i .

In those cases of jdio^t^iio AeVamf^, jifia 9f^ 4there. ai;e . ffenioiiitor^.^jmptoiiv; ^-^oes
the patient appear uncon^fortabjle for some Bme ^fore .theattiiclh^ comesrOn? '^^W^l
Does his appetite and desire for food contiAne *s tisoal?^ vteat'is i^oi sc^ mBap^i;|ip-*'^''

he complains more oCth/e j]|iiscles of his ne^.-^!Does heucc^tix^ue io I^e tVjttyif'

for food for some time previops to, a s^pous ^tacjt ? Bj^ jsulj 4p sp, jiiujuii ^dfip Ijlif^
bat he complains, mpre pf sUpiess i^.,€(i^ l^ack, of. i^ nfet^aod/Stll&i^ss Ju^'w W^ff
his neck«-H9e majv jk^i sja^r, to ^ifl^ *^^®^'"* of tfce^eipqafi ^tta^? , X^P* o' 1 '1/

Lord CAMPBSXiU~H&,mi^tdo.Fb«^ > Qf/iwy.taka iiii^<£9QdtasWqid.]vi^l^Jv(tl^
himzsofthaein^ilK^}^r^;i^](f^pt9imiai : ^.n .• - - ...1 j ■ : . : iV.>- .;: la : fu. .:

Mr. JBajtaai*Sht9J*^Dsa6»^4im tauialA hMurs^sqi|M»iiigi HieAtlftck^ b«i theiinify
«Bd0r ^piikhrfaft^Bafos^doasifat/iKem jQtifti taieettih Iub vnAimta^ Aodt * Hia illJMii Aa
BuirediieefedVfo^ifae atilKtea.oC:Utf)JBoaikandifae 8li&«B «f <lni«edbit-Tav i|iii)ib
ititiiinl3«tlYttii«tB0fiilbe(«llac& hcb^jaiMhti his Jiiod at if nojattaBk.>ii«#i m|luidi iy,
im, dQaig^lio^Meit»iaBtt#iLtlM(QaboiilB<wJbidi encode &e tot tttlMEk»:dMt fabart
appear less desirous of food, and less inelined to eat it ? I hant neveKiiaardTthal 9aAr
plaint. — ^Yondo not remeinjticr.tha(t t)ie dtsiie for food oontymed within twdTe hoois
previously^? , I ^have n^rer heard that complaint. — ^Have you known cases of idiopfithie
tftanoshi^hWb the 'firk paroxysm was in bed? Yes. — ^Haye yon known it to 1w pre-
ceded some tim^ with restlessness in bed? I have known it preceded by stiffiiesS of tKe
neds. andnioath^ and JJiSLyre kno>m those c^ses take place in women after confinemenl,
atftet miscahriage* sometimes dilBiCalty of swallowing is obserred. — And also a dlsmcfi-
nation to try' to s^^Ullow? Where there is difficulty there is sometimes disindinatioou

' r " Ite-examined byHhe ^iom^-Gtfiwro/.

« . % What Interval iia^ i^ecurted Iq. those cases that hare oqme under yonr attentiMOQ be
^ Iweeii the jprmonttajy sin^ and the tetanic convulsions? Jn an infant not voce

'than twelye hours^— And in an adult? From twelve to twenty-four hof^rsj 'soine^«s

mofe thaii.that — And from the commencement of the tetanic convuUigivs t^ deaths what
'time? That win varjf, three days to ten days; it may take^ place .earl^,' sometimes
.perhaps in two ^ys, butibat is early.— l>oes tbat.ai^ty toTroinat^ as/wjeH ps idibpathic

tetani^^i ,j'Vkef^ »re ]t«^ alii^e whefl the .dj^eaj^e ^ts^^m^lis ;]^i^5^;'^e^^ii^ of the

i ,^^ 4J4gnfif§Lf,iT^hpK idiopi^thii^and ^iQ|natie oni^^^E^^ 9^{ tMi : i^<^>at|DC
seems to proceed without any external injury, and tromati^^. ^ *

Atforneu-uerierai. — Is the disease much more prevalent mliidia than it is m this

- TlMf 'Mto^^j''G€nerQ(l^Xi tAe fiseiase much |nore~pcevalent in .iniua ihan' it is in this
' cotttily ?^ ^'nMSs^^ftMnk ai^ iitlidh^tnbretMi)yneltr-iik'Jbdfiu^l^'%e'S:^ or

'l^#3v^ V^c^^iad b^ ttis<iK^3t^2^?ld<^'t|Ot'\|ft& ^hMi^tfAeei ^^enoiAe
'^k4Ip'tli^'^if»i^s''<tf'tfeteWir« mbiaa£:^m^ etctkflow

^a imU^kd^liS^^ drW s^ df tiTeuty

.1

I li: .f^aa[aMijdfeSiiifaniiKte)tdcbt«f}pql^^ i aftetideA before the

f d m awt Sa iiiDiKstjon?ikp ^Ubdjo c£ Mxki Qtbkqt a&nlkftiierdietriita iwtoinsd laearcbed

.' iheaiorfiri irftHiihnirl iiii fflji^ 1 iliiji ' iM)hiriheTM[fe«f dgMeBAtryl^fannd fcHane piyers, sad

^'tooiOtUinBslHtai tUsfriaqpkTHaltfttedhcitKlig^pteiBf^s^ mi ttae papers

Iwar^fcirfAlM j tf a ieettip(tfa«aiir^e>iw lt i w^^ anme in Palmer's

lieA^rvbid p^HttaiDdab&sVketf fpati^fiimtuda9dbmrfnfrtm,JnS['i^mi all I fsmid into one

plaoKniiiiflridnniin9^ioo& ^rlEaaili wai(Mcjigiefljt^jdoor«rfL ^ad tite key in tty poeket

yQw tk&#41<faifag^y(fioAy,^ijiii»BMiiifitifcii ^hafap •r^eieation fiom' themin the

presence of George radmer, the brother of the prisoner. — ^He is an attomef in Sn^ley ?

He is : I cannot say I had^jtrtp hiag. n iH r 1 ^ h tmJmtA jmmt' ihout to do ; he was m the

house and I fiHmd liim th^ „pr.^Qa9^.)p i|»l».w|» tfiT a^nranls ; M "^^9* .jrfesent

when I went throogii.^^ 9fm^Tjik»Jgtf9$9¥.im^fA:Af^ j^jg^Omda^; t m^ «WMted in

^^HrfiOm^ tib ^^^flf'¥ySi<i)pMllf @4lp'«M>'»n'i'IWdllMhM: the eB))«TiDtendeat,
and I mtie a lelectioB from the papers ; eieDtOKlIf I tied np all the papen ; 1 ^are up
tfcaffl— irfiM .Mtrtlioai; ti-renUmad ihe •dtctioti.mr the Monday, and took them all
ain7:9ae(taiMlimD'«Bft><UrewoJl<nidBm<buVl-thi^ Dot miTiMsilay ; tveDtuslly
I thniit all tht papen b a black leather bag without making say Mleotion, every paper
l^!)idJ»rillD'.I^Mi^>RlhiW>4<|[ ^!WW«A«Wmi.tff.,a»ffl>rAiI wu present Bome days
after, on the Mth, when the bagva^flocqed'jqjnijr.piiefWiCei Tflwiltlw.paiwrs were gone
throagh minutely by Mr. Deaiie ihe solicitpr. ~

Lord Campbell,— On 'i^pseiielial^ifiaSfr.&aa'ne 'act ^ .tte was acting for the pro-

secntion, and Mr. DeanedSifeiM'iheJii?'' '•'' ' """ ' ""'' '

"■''TtS'««fflB-BHfej'-!2WiaV'*is;'a(6ii tfitlii!^';VpHi> cWlfled? Theywere
pnt'M'1J^nlfiWWSiR''iU9it^, VVorifeaWJM^

i^P^d'^ftet^'ida'ihey'Mtfet^ and possessioti;

'i^'l'ftSsmrtp^'flirtiSr^ ttfiiaSitfi' Miitim;t'^4'-ihat the jipers were.
fm:*tkVbHUmii,ltbt-'£'cViwe:'mT^ slkdStUre Of Mr. Cook on

MtfftKwytfciWT^WeV'l-Afd'iiiiPfffid'iiy p^ signature of

Mr.Codt''i^ie^^bii1>im'o^WWla*ge;i»ftKWaiWP;ania<*a#T'edi^^
baid'«e»&'v^MiMtd 'fbf 'iif^ beMflt bf'MH Caift/iuid'tIlA"Pa!Wrwd' Mtl no benefit
from them; no each document was seen by me ; maWy'^TfltWftii-papet^'Irtte atferwardfi
i««uniM.^tbOeoT£»'aB'William I^bnar^Mrt Deftmi lelecthdiidllaige dumber i>f letters
id dacnmeaH, [Trivate aooounls and >p«inita' letters^ lehiehrnerai-d^iinerediito laspeeMr

^ikp^wilU iiiitooMtons to diJiveiihen loGeoirgo^Paliim.—- IMbaa ubs'.Wllllani: Palmar
affeUcdj.. On- the. night of the IGlh of DaeeEMbHr^ Icmcdild^ 4b»iSaqiftt on Mr.
CookJ aBd.rekaember Mr. Boberti and Mr. Nevtoa beitigi«cam)A«d'^'>l'dii'.iuC: fetch Mh
-UewUdnO'bseiaBitBed. .•■■,,;.- 'if" ■.ui-vil' ■■-■ . •■

"'"■" '\" '■ ' Cross-examioed by Mr. Sn^roni SAjJirV''""- ''"■',"['' ,'

'"'1X6 inquest was held at the Talbot Arms, wa« it po{?,"'tt'.'.;wi|^"(«^ jt^-.continued
wAraJ.dBJa.; it whs adjourned from day 10 day ; I cannot say how inafljw* it was held
cbnseifBliyeiyi! ^ think, it »aa one day each time until the laat, when , it -wa* .lield on
Th^dap, Friday, and Saturday; I think there was a fortnigbi iatervaf ^fiBtirefU the
first aod second meetings; the firM meeting wa« merely to impanel ihe jury.,.

Lord Camfbeu. — There must be some one who can speak, to these facts more accu-
rately than this wimesa.

' M^. Serjeant SA^e.T-Tiiete were several meetings, arid before it was cobcWd^d a ibrl-
oigft^OT More pMsedT I think so, more ; the prisoner Palmer wm arrested adayor'tWo
he(tire:the,T^i(!twaideliyered, by the sheriff in a civil process; tewasolwut Uieirtiwe
pteviduB te tiiat tltn« 'liUtil lie was arrested on the civil procea.— He did not ^nd t^«
iiHiaeai da flkat day? ' HS~^ not ; he was not present, nor was any, one acting pro-
E!«IOnSllyf<tr,WiSj I'fli'iiloi.know there had been att officer from the IJinAon police It
Ru^lfeyfo-mStiito'ltettre thS' death of Mr. Cook •■ ! heard 6f IhEpectoi^ Keld berrttf therfe,
butldQpot kBowbim: I dp not know the mother of DdUou alluded to l^f ElItt&'btQi
HiU^'Ti^¥h^flte)V^lta'Jfleh''^>teAfcari^tIW'Dtittoii«,'MUdd'tttii'U^'ih^ I
W4H*t<»tfflH'«otf'-W«9rt: •'-'■"■" '■'■■■ .- '■'■'■■'■ ;;■ ■■'■;"" !'-''^'i;i;l"i;i"'^'^^;
__^ Mr. HEWKjrM'^'^t^.fifej^l'JJfe Bwo^^'|iBpiiiecl^t^^Mr:^i(^.^J,JI''''"

assarted tfaoae*papm and aeleciEed smnap^^u^j.
nnsealed in my presence, and I went tBrougB ,««
Hatttm, hbd'-inyMT; «^f i«!HHn"l%KHft¥^ih
purpoie or aelwtfa^ ttaoMnwIikli^tragtoifieaMaijrx,

retnmhife Aoib -wfakdintBifciiMadtwWB tpittlii) bwKhao af^lMe ■pOaoaa^mi^i Etem^a
Tery ew4deidd^'qiiAti4ritd^Ma@e'IPdtMr:)iltAt>iwb^^ikifiql»iwi-«BB<aihilBtM|(]ffMad
DO Qhemte piup(Mi|r'4^'>^"EP«'''*f^''<><>^'°i>''*'^!"N'i<lrfiB^ iub&ar4ljC3mhlre
ipeifcW the dDenmrall<«ld*L<lhe>^itiaiWf»)4(in«M'*>BiB[toiAteM^lklBlifiifaiid<ika-imch
papar) l^teAtd AtxaiAvdiAe^nHiBfitrdonimifnAdngD^ ^«Ttififa[A;>lHa« InUenA'ae
eatewt ■qi thanitaitt tu^tbnnoabcatlte&liyiMiMnilAaMr.ieMA^iBamfaBddaAioB^i'hpr
anyHiiDg- like il: ■ H ' t^'Gtot^ igaHifajidiaaiflaatir, -(mm i MnEtel^otwii 1 j%M< i were
'etuinMM^imi'.'ii' " " '"' '"

IM TRML Gf WILIIAK* PAlMOU

We were, and it ▼» in my emptfyTmcbtTidd Ume ^wft iaTllt^4fymiik-fMt-^^mi»Ht^-
Ungeley merely » part of one day, bat he waa at Stafford, rtfainlc/lbP'tiirree ertft»ar issfV
altogether: he did not ftee the priaoner during his stay in'flililf€ffii« hifcr^iiiriad^beiid
preeeded by that of another officer 'of the nime of Siteipaon v ' I^ simi hia lAeMi 'part 'of tiie.
day Field was there, and at SKafford, but not at anjrothet* tin^ : 'hei wen* §mb fStttSatAto
Kugeley with myself and Field ? he told me h^ Ha« seett Pahner b«lbi»t' (Umfson oawe ter
StalPordshire, on qiyoetaiaer, in- the beginning of Obtob^. • • « • ' m ; .• i: (.

Re-examined l^y Mr, /am<?5, ," \ \ . ..!'.' 11' '
; For what purpose was Field sent down ? To maJig^ inqn^iriei^.as to jkhe hal^ts of fife o^
Walter Palmer, of whose deat]^ the o$ce, before l^ad shortly jr^ceiyecl, jgyodce, a^ also to
inquire into the circumstances of a person of tl^e^ame.of l^t^B, witl^Te^remceloiSkpro-.
posal for an insurance of 25,000/. on his li£s. < '

Mr, ESPIN sworn,— Examined by Mr. Jamm,

You are a solicitor in Davids Street; Berkeley SftUAre ? I ,am.— Are you sdljcltof
for Mr. Padwick ? Yes ; I produce a bill for 2000/., which was placed in my lumdri by tliat
gentleman, to enforce} payment of from the •prisoner; I do not know the prisoner^
handwriting,

[Mr. Strcncbruigey th^ manager of the ProTindal Bank at Rugel^, proved the indore'ing
and drawing of the biU referred to was in the prisoner's handwriting, and that the
aoeeptanoe, purporting to be that of SamkPahner, was not in her haudwrjiting.

The bill, which purported to be drawn by Wiliiam Palmer on Mrs. Sarah Palmer, and
purporting 'to be accepted by her, dated 8 July,, 1854, for 20Q0/„ at three moijths after
date, was put in and read.]

Mr. Tames.— This bill would be due on the 6th of October, 1854? Yes; lOOOi. had
been paid off the bill when it was placed in my hands ; the bill was placed in my hands
fi>r tiie purpo6e>of enlbrciing payment t it must have been aibout the ISth of Becemhe^
because I si^ed Judgment and issued execution on that day, and it moat have been a day
op two {lre¥10ul^; I «igned judgment a day or two a£ler it .was placed ia my hands ; X did
nei aipf^y iGor Ihe money m November ^ I have two letters here from WlUlam Fabtt^f
addressed to Mr. Padwick. '

II {Me.- iSira«^>*iV2^' identified the writing of the twa letter^ dated la.iiovmaler, 19&5;
and 26 November, 1865, which were put in and read.]

'■ H«ve*yotf got the cheque whieh that letter of the I2tk of Nevembet enolttNid? - That
i» the cheque fpiHKfti««R^ tt) telOOO^. ; H is dated JI8th NQUcmber, caanina ia a letter
of ihe lath of Novemb^s that ehe^jiae was not paii^^iand I no# prodnfielb ii«|«kl} I'
pttidtee ajioihei! ohsqve, ^ted 8th Deoemben igea^* iop^GQlQi^f^T^^kem^tm'itmg' rf th$
pHiongr t6 ih9'€hequ$ r^mredta vjm proved by Mtf Sktavhridg^tmd U wmpifek ^ mik jftod,)
'Fhaft eheqne was* not paid : vi was reeevved SLbout ^r dwbe -i^ati % taw d«9» afte* ^ other
lacNMl eheque was dishenourfd : up* to thedale of the excmxtionrl ttMt doim on the Utb,
the 1000/. still remained due : it vfss a ^a^ mu agmuwt his f«rsmi en, likiob )mi 'Wm tahem

,, ' ■ Cross-examined by Mr. '/S'tfr/<?fl»lf /J5J4«^. "" •'

. Whe»<Bd jrou firs^ see the qheque of 8 December J I Ijbink a Say' or two before the
12th I I believe all tbe documents were placed in my han*^ iogefherj' I thibk^K).

• Mn, J<me9r^DQ not tell us whMoocuived; #ttt wi^ aih sfetloot hrbudhit against the
ntothec.'on'this'foiH? Therewa»*<^Hftve.yQ«'gQ|«U tli^..paj»efs hare-? lAave*

■•^^ • " M^. WI%LIA*f BAMFORP sworh.-|^;B*2rtA^iSed^by'the MUrM^*am4i^(a, '
,^ou .aj:€j^.surg^o|i aii4 m^tcal practitioner at Hugel^y ?'*'A sykeoji at^d apothep^iy

ntRugeieyin ^taf^rdshJ^^e* — ^l^yhen did^qu tfrst see tHe d^ceasea John I'ai^ons Cook?

On Saturd;ay 17 Novembevv — Bid William Palmer .-desire you to visit the deceased?

William Palu^ called on 9i§;«9i^{ nael4vfktf^«jf^i|^,^.his who was unw^U at the

TalhP^.Arnft^-^WJjAM Mb^ «i*.f^f^iw ^l^H* ,.t^c stat^ of Cook?

That he ha4 been dining Tilth him the day before, and had takeps Vk^ xpuch wine.— Did
he say what wine ? Chaanp^gne ; I walked down with Palmer to see Coo^ and I asked
him i^ he had taken too W^c^k i^^ts the day hetee^and h^ ansffrewd XOi^ he took about two
glasses 7 , 1 .did> not. Ikud ^09 as fUfit<H»4t pi •. a -biiiow^oUaFa^ter ab9u^ Ci9ok ; n^^ u>pear9^ce
of bik whik I fiiw bwn^hut a^i|o<w^|a8i(ty<xm^iji|gj|. Palmer h^A hee^ ^^ up ^W ^^ni'
v^ to.himftt m «'el0#it i 9We9n)Mf» l4i9e«3^SiAn<!^ing.4r^u§]^t |i)r ]^im».» s^^-qunce
mixture.

Lord Campbex£.*~-A11 aUtk tpptofc oal<th(aldii|niHiinHi

"^e AUormy-fhiteriBtl-^IM your- afmr^hMQ^ v^^resiyibe Mgr^^Mi^liaKt Tfaait^&s
ieend visit ; I never saw him take any of thosfl piUa> I pv^mnd som« mediciaei

§mxB. pay; ■ v^^ to^:i9;»«' ie5

«Mi>ttifiU»)«kikM9mi Vivptai MIto ^.P^^

tfa8pilift(*iir.|]|i» MMi»y ef cBtUg^.-I 4oQk thon. mivelf } I took both the mediciae. whkk
ItgvNiiam'liL/tilM miwm^>ra>td the pilU in &e «T«iUAg 4 I took then to the Talbot Anw,
nd gifvrilicai «Imb serranl 'W^hoiwd heen urai^ng vp^ hiip» b<a I oaanot say her name ;
I M«r>iier4nk»ilhiai«^ftliir».}rthqni piUs were Qf< the s^am ingredients as I had made
ftrhMftQfti4iNt8ftlui4l|]Si S|nn4ft^ (^^Monda^^-rDid jqh see Palmer on the Tuesday ? I
sair him on the ToMday mornug.;,! wea going, down, .to tee. the patient when he met
me; I asked him if he liad seen Cook the night bef6re ] he said he saw him between 9 and
10 o'clock, and he waft with him fbr half an hotir ; he requested I would not go to disturb
him, as hrWitotwishlb^^o see hkny tnA I wenthbrnewiiftomt seeing him; between 12
tttid 1*^ eMi^^PAlMler mtftrnie v^^fthi ) I Wa» going to Mb Ook when he stopped me» and
8«iaiM>tlid'«IMli4ih'bIm<lJriturbedv'P«lm«lt said lie Wa^ still sod qniet* and he did not
wish him to be disturbed; at 7 o'dock P^iiereame n|> to my heuse again, and
requested ine to go down and see him again ^ thdt W114 .the ^t time on the Tuesday. —
After ;ypo }^ seen Cook, did you jp out with Mr. Jones and William Palmer? I did ;
I waited, out with MV.'J(mes and WilliAm Palmer .-*-Hadvou any coairersation with them
oatsioe ?' rfothing more than Pklmer said he Would rather wieh him to have his pills
again : atid Mr. Palmer walked with me to my house for theih.-^At the time Palmer sud
he wished him to have his pills again, did he say anything else ? Nothing more to me,
but fae^'ftaid'^e would walk upwith me fbr them.-^ftid he iHfit «p wi^ you for them?
He did ; he stood by while I prepared f htm ; I prepared th*m in my surgery, and he
stood by ; he ^w me weigh the ingredients o6t.'-*md ybu- any stryehnfi on yonr pre-
mA^? ' ¥e6,'in a oupbonrd in my <priTate hxmi, biit notin-mysuvgcty ; nfler I made up
ftepiMTifrote the Section, *« The nigM pills: J^ka 'Parswis Gook^ £sq. ;" Iwn»tetih»
direction fbr tiie pills every night ; I wrote the same on all the foi«r nights } Mithe Tnes-
day, before I wrote' the direction, Palmer requested I would put the direction on^ nothing
nare^ aaad he taw me write it^^What passed between ycm? X do not know anything
pass^ while 1 was preparing themi he took them away with him ; nothing else was said
by him aboot writing the d^ection ; I never saw Cook alive after that tim»»

Lord GAVPBBI.&. — ^What time was it when Palmer took u^ay the pills? Between
7 and B o'elock ; I eannot exactly say when Palmer took away the pills ; I wrapped the
direction and t^e box up in a separate paper and sealed it before I gave th^m to him.

The Att&hiey^Memi.~^Whmi yousay yousttded it^did you pat any impression on
it ? Nothing more than sealing-wax at eaeh end of the box 9 the words ** JKight fnlls "
vwewfittm onfth^outnde paper:- IhAr^ was i «6pamte .pap«r.-^W«s there anything
irritteaon th0 bat-? N^frsnylhing' written on the boxi after I had put them in the bfivC'
I took liMi direathmvtUed&t'upt then wrapped it np .in a. sepamte pit(oe of papiu*( fiiQ
diieoiiofr waa wiittan en a Mfuaoe pieee beiween the boxraad tiie outside paper.t. I sealed
the two eods of the outside paper at each end of the bos ) there was nothing written «n
it) I swtr Coak^Badaib jtOnnnntea past l^ as near as could be; I uad«i»tood hfi wa&
^ve when they eanoae np for mc, and I could not have been above 5 or ilQ minutes
befiir&Ic«aiev**<-In what state did you.find.the body ? I found the body, stretched ouli .
stiff, as straight as it could be, on its heels and back, with each arm in a rigid state at
the side of him. — ^Was there anylhing^ in the position of the body unnatural ? Nothing
that I saw : his arms extended down eath side of his body, tiud his hands clettched as
mine are : I gave it as my opinion that he died from apoplexy, and I filled up a certifi-
cate accordingly .--%(^ho asked yon to fill up the certlflciate ? Pilmer ; I had the form of
the certificffte* hi- my d#h |»l«es»!6h ': 'loh Pftlme^«8ihlg• ffle t»'«ll tip Ae diMifiemM I..

. ipi

^ say why you onght not to i^p let jit go ? Hct 4^^ ndt ally irio^e. . ^ , . , ,

Cross^fitebninei^by'Mti. .^>ti»tt^Sl^«^^ •« '• < -
Howfhi'ift your houjtofhM'PiUm«r's h()FUBe« 1 eoH6oi Hl^ a^^'^ort difstanco?'
Perhapi 3d() yara*. ' .' ;- / \ ' \

• Mr. THOMAS Pi£4TT swosif .rrCxamined by !&£r. itamef, , .
Are you s EoAicHo^ ? I am.---Wh^e are you ia pi»«tise ? dn Queen Street, May Pair.
—Were you acquainted with the prisoner) Winiam Palmer?' 1 was ; my acquaintance
with him oommenced in tiie latter end <^ ied»i I obtainMPI^ kimia loan of 1000<», which
^as ultimately paid in the end of November, 1853 : in October, 1854, 1 was employed
by him i» mnke a tdMia. on two pQU«M».«B/the4i£ir<^ AoiB P^6r,-^000(.ifr^Na the Sun,
aaA SKNK ftoA. tlM Vonm^eh. MAMii^ii'^^rnwil^Ii^f^jiHM^l^i^ V9^fVimt of three biUs,

.sttbseqisentiy obtamed,>iji|»r J^ • n^e.dlie. fMsk .i<)««t]M^POHc]i!t>^tliaKCiFWiH:ifiOtf.~ef.1ii«t
money not 8o apptiedt <6500^ ir^«ppUed .^pftvmjBBi <tf ,t}ilM iMNMj tiuSbttlisiJkSaeiiiiB
Feceivedy or the jopney va^a^iJliedrM CO^ffeito^ ftur.^iipiafMfMMi liiOtQiikc^^paaent'itf
any liabilities. — la Aprili 1$$5^ . did. 1}^ make' any appliiaKlion Air iksloaodfondayilioifn^?
He did ; for a loaa ofiOQQl^; i fm .ibpt ^utnJi^if^tfi^ ^kAVWff90» far.Hrittdbitiiee'lOBi
was required; no horses weceiJ^fn^osed#^d. h ^ti^(4^<)ia^teAn«QtitJltf'secB%ity'«ftft
bill, drawn by himself; A>r ^9000(> a|id aj9^sQ>l^7by< $MR^^

'bills, which wera heH by iny^ell,, oc <4^torot»iwiioi^iftih€^t4l9lhMje|?J!ffoin^
had adyanced money 09 ik&x^:i,h^T mete -ntl^ Yiy, n^ i^jfnt^nfi^^
— ^Now what was due oa those bUls a;t tliBt time?'^ l^net ware^tflfO^biiitfiQTttdse^
that time. — (The eight bills produced by the toitness were put m and r^cK^.^-HGHT JiMse !■&
was 6000/. renewed and doe mJwnmrfrMfn^ 7,500k ovwAae ixrywMir faiiiids after Noyember ?
Two bills of 2000/. each, due respectiyely 25th and 27th October, I beUeye, wene thfconly
Inlls which w^e dike at the tle^ibd VluaM loi the 20tfa N^y^b^j: .^e'o^^.hiul
been renewed, with ^C' exception of oiie f<^50Pl:and 1000/.,^hibH w^l^^Md 6y&f jfrdin
month to month, and the inttirfejt fo^hftlding. these ^ik ov^ waisTto be pamXaTaifiom
month to 'month; flifeseUiI!s,''with t#o ' e^ceptioias, were di6cooiit6d .^t tlie 'ratfe of
60 per cent ; these exceptiWjs weri 40 pci* tent., that was ijnly on twd occastttte, imd ijot
continued " "* "^"^ '"-'*'•■*'« '^ - •..!..,.,% • .«» .»,.. L*»^.ji.

due. — Do ^

of last yeaf t "I Hr«*; fri^thic^"bfl!fce'i(>risotter t ..

Office foi' a *irttt 'ot hotef 6i;Hihe^ policy on l;^is life ; the amount Iclaimed na^ 13,000/. ;
Satah P^Khh^ icf th^^)6lrl^^8<ttttth^; sanAfeom time to time I addressed lettecti t6 her
whilVf Vj««th^ Hcfldlr df'flieife KUS* on the 16th of September, 1855, 1 wroteift 1)^^/^
fhe'prlsonef.'"'"^ •••^"''"' ---^ ■• , . ^-^ •

[^Captaiu Nation idept^ed ihe letter referred to and several others, produced as
ha^m^ b^eh ^und'aijiio^g ttie prisoner's papers. — ^The letter was then readO

Was the I^ince of Walep the office in which you were claiming the 13,000/. fcr the

prisoner ou Walter Painxer's ^eath? — ^Yes. {A fetterofthe 24<A Septemberfr^m Jfr* JVaft

tp i^ahner, ond^ a IfHer doted October ^nd, were then read.) — 1 presume you bad wnttan

to Mrs. l^tmer in consequence of the reference to her ? I presume X had in QonQeqaenee

rof that.. (A ^letter from the prisoner to Mr. Pratt, dated Oct» 5i^ 1855, and letters from Mr.

\Pratt io thepriisoner, dated Oct,.4th, Oct. lOth, and Oct l^h, were readB) . On the 2Tth«f

.October Palmer calW QQ me and paid me 2d0/.<on at^eount oC thf» priucipli momf of

, the two bills (due. pu the 26th and 27th ; I waa to have a further payment m»the courte

fof a.fday oiT two ;. I think the following Wednesday he said .hi9 woold.sead metanether

, s^Kii of 260/., a^d that be was to take an qpportnmtty of ^tia^t me liave.^ balanceof

4be;ptKnQipalby payments as quickly as possible. . • . • ; ./ . i> . 1 •-

' 1 [Captain, Jff^pn proved ^at he did aot find atneofg the kttets- ia .tfae* prisoner's poe-

<ession<K$y letter dat«icl 27th of Ocxtx>ber. ' . '. 1 1/ ■• .1: >

:'"' A fetter' bf'the S^fh^f October was called f6rl)y Mi'! JdWes kiia M ^roAiicea'.l

^ ..^^Xf Secant. JShe^ fiMbmitted that the nqii^ to producp,. se)rved on, .^ pirifioner, callitg
tTfi^ l^f^^i^^^^^^romMr^^^ ., .1

III LL«!d GiiHrBZSiL.^If the tetter m worth asking fbr, ^ nptJfce Jr stlfficieht. ' '

[ ' ^ Jfti^^ iTai^i^^^ the^ lettei ^f the; 28'tii Octpbe f, froA ^ P^i^fi^er hx , yofirself?

lliiii is 'i^. i(Ty^ lettfr wa^jp^uced Sfwi read-^ ,0 tetter ^Isij Qcfober^frofri^ Mr^ ^'*<*4f ^^ ^^
'''*96nef' teas also reaa,\-r^ii the 6tli cf November ai'dvy 911 juBsiie wrjts,? t did. agamst the
s^n^lr^d W^4t&^ itl^t^o-^^^^^ Vrits to'iSI Ciiahb,

icfllijlto)^ atK%e!eJ.;'T!i^^ letter wMoi^t datkfriipi'Ae. prisoner to me^ from

the Wd«iWe&felitTb'ellevfe'rT^ceiv^4l;^ 9ih W November. (Me letter was handed
in and read): on the 10th of Nov^lilWFaM^'VialMoti me,'and palid me 300/.; with
the two sums I had recbividd hja^bPSi^m^dfpktpiMjA^^^^^ bills.

'^W^s..awe/a^^4j»»,«fi80p/.;d^dp<^jfer.,tJlie.toe aM the credit ws 500/.

tJh itccownt <j^tij«t j^ln^fflU imt^mM^i^^^mV^(^rwM^ f^e ftirther mcmey, but
I:tdo'&ot thfljgle a»)ftEiR»jK>6ttive Wftssald 8^eiki1>iU; 'I fesryief iKrt any recollection of any
definite sum being fixed : I think I mi^htjtiav^ 4»eBtieped-the met of the wtits being
issued; I ^ave no doubt, I did meintion it,, but J have npt^^y positive .recollection of it
{Letters 0/ ^W l^M ^ Me^^J 'JWwH'^^^ dhd the Uth Mvemberjrctn

ffieprHsimir 1^ Bfr, 'Prm^\m%^4^ M^^.)'^ TVitt^ldfles to k payiiie&t ;' and a person
whose name T do not know called on me with a oheq#6'<^)^attirday^lie iJthof Koveitt-
ber, and paid me 900/. on account* ailbth«r{priBaMrf»'timt^;ira» a dieq<0Bid^

iaitf.>^-JffdA4iar^1tofti9tH^bfuN«i<^ei^^ TattemaS'r after

^iitinsyaxdsT&m;<4ULl Bidalde#^^lffl<r4A1ydat«M»'«he^49tl»? ' Yes; 1i« eaUed, I tliiiili,
ia£txstj»w(9k}^piiM glga«il^4h« '^fM^ jk)# *jfietAxS6ei, 4rbi«^'iras draim out by mTself
tit«i7i«Pi^«n<&at dfl^r (fiwi>)i^ vM <Mtf}- '^^'^<i^i>«^ ^h&V b« g&^e me 3o2. in
oot^jiitidl wlplfl&ft o^!i(^[tt(^f^' ^/;;^ii«d(itf#''» ^5CP?.$'=I BeIieV« It was a cheque of Mr.
•Htfr^«^tWihtfi«ra»^<jfcfeJtd*cJiBittt»^f Ad^'4«0i?.r "Tlf^'450/. »€ said I should receive
thibagiiJike|p08«if&m!a'4Ml<«A^ hii^t s^' which; I afterwards

YiwiviBiibB^(^&f^^^mnp1ff[r.^'U^mA j^bdttiied'; fdr"45W., 'and it was paid throu^
flqr1mW'8>«^Afltoiide'ttl pS\iA^nFtBOOV&[i mouritf' Yes. X^.eiters cf the ^Ist of
uy««ife*wv>/WW*A*^*^*d«# fii^lSff, Ppd1$^^dniF4in^vf'mveme^, fhm Mr; PtdH to the pK-

•:n\'%Si^"^fkpif^PT^ of the ?iHh' 'NoypiAlier^ fropi I^ilmer to Pratt, and

^^Wx5''W\dP'^^/*9 **W.«^;/rf,% «a«n5.1*f^ %** ^?''^^ ^Mfe^ Palmer to Pratt;
^^iTOtfTJrf.Y?^ y*^^ *^^ ^*^ ^ i- did,— Did he s?g* |that.^appr, iWie body of which is m
.yt'^,.TOjpp9;.«il that interview ? Yes,— 'X^atif, **4 M^W paii y4» thw day 100/. j 75/.
.yoi^.lnlf jay^ifpi: j^ije^iral of .1^00/;, d»^ 9th J^Qvem^, f<st^0ft,^lmoftth, W^ 2bLaa account
'%^^IM-*'^^'^P^ 0<?tober, mal^ipfr l3a5/*o^^,t%*a<5<:cTOV"/ gaityon.TeQ^ved»eheqtte
.yf,?Sf. ff^m /Mf»^s. WjBtherby ? xe&r^Had tha;^ fbeftijM||)e«n;pftidM,fhiG^ or »pt ? No,
M^iP^'*#'T-Then there is a letter <rf tW^A JioyenA^

".^tnetjl^liriTate.andi confide^ntial* . ^* ^y d^,^ii:^ti^ui ^^r^l Pook-g /nends. oail
o» y(Ji,td'. inow what inoney Cook ewr had < of. ^op^rp^y^^o^^f ^^fei;,tll^.^e8tion 0r
J% .^1^^ aboutr money xnatters -antii I haive. 8ee;i.a^op,,,ivi4i Qp^'fi J^^X^ faiitbfuUy
Wiliiam Palmer.^' There was a bill of sale alluded to m ike correspondeni^.ioiot a. mate
called Polestar, and another horse called Syrius ; did ^ou Kapw Jobn^ P^rspn's Co^k the
Aeceaisfed? J did not.— When was that bill of saleexw-iji^drf ' .Arth« befeaming pf
September.-^l>id you ever see Cook on the subject Of tt^JoWt^. I^ever '«aW him f^t all.
^W&okade the application and transacted the loan? The fHsoiieT'.'^'^it wiis to be
li^vMc^ upmi that bill of sale ? It was an acceptance fbr dOO/:^^ra*wn' ^)f Palmer bn
Co«k? . VM^'At tiiat time.— Was there a bill afterwards dirawn? The bill Was sjent tp me
tbwugh'the pdst, withttttt any drawer's name.— The bill of sal^rbeafi-'dAte Cth ^ptemb^,
lft5S: have you any letter from Palmer on the subject Of the applfeatibii fbr that l«in ;''l
tbfek. yob hkve two in Jtily and August ? The first is fieth of Attgttrt> a^d there is
anothei*' 6rithe^ SDth.^In 'iSiat wwthe acceptance of ■CobK f6t' 50er. eiclbftcd? ' ¥«tS;—
Did yon =advji«<»'dij that' aeee^tanefe forwhiph the bin'of sale t^a^ cxyUtttetat sechtitj^'a
stim -df' 87iA'afid''«« wlne^i^Btrranf? Yes."— Yon have twd Im^s 'of ^ ^ei'ijih' atid
the 9th Set)tettiberi^bi^'idm .PAlm^r-^o Pratt, iri -'Conit)liji6de Smh'ttkr'I^^r
of the 9th ; did you write this letter of t*ie tO^^ptember aod address it tbW;'P)ilnie?r,
^t Offioe,)PoBbaflterf :t¥e8>l4-QUdM^40tte9ciieii»8ei3Oor! fayn0tfsattd'ih4^'dh«qbe for
375/. payable to Mr. Cook? Yes.— You directed; t^t itO'i this JNiat Oflhtb^DoneifMer,
enclosii^ ^QQ(. CT?kJ&ff4 1^ vChQ(|u#,4w 37^^^ ^J^A,w4iWfrWfWfv5 ;?fftMli^V^9\ con-
sideration for the bifl of sale andCook^s acceptance for 500/.?, Yes^— The Qthei;;300/.
i^hich .yew -stfj* ythi"Bekit'}n' cdSh,- Bkd' that' aitrjjthiri^ -to dt? wittf C6bk*J^ trap$ait(ons ?
No,— Then there il' A' 'short- letter' frbtti IPflmer 'ackndirl<idghig^'1fie 'receii)t''bf ^bat

WiU'yon lookiat/tMs ^JheTqud lbriS?i5?.;'«lie'%ikctet%efi&eAt U^H «tid sa/>**<IfcaA iA'the
handwriting of Mir. Cook?' fJ^o<>^¥«f (»fcte«^eUhtrtlw!t -slIwildM is^^'^l/'i'W^i. P.
Oookt" how was he In KIN* lumi if ri^ritk^if Mi^i^me^'^^P'iitm^knm hmi' Write'hls
name any other way ttian^«*J^Pat«©tffee«]4.«^?ii^fi T AMiir I h^^xh^.i.. <iu

' _ Mr. OTRAWBlfti>a«-,r;^b^Jf \

. Look at these acceptances, pnrporMpg t'o/bo. wi*J^ thtj'^^gnatufe of ^arat Palmpr, or
111 the handwriting of Siarah.P4mi9?:j?uf « iUro cfTr-- f-'if;.'. f><

tft< ^9tm^ iS^«v»-?r-lA,«hat>8ltfideaBittaih(thMli»aaa d n (;(>o'> v. ,n> • •.

Lord CABiFBELL.-*r-We all think it is admissible.

f :. 1 .

lee TBuuL or wvlum puaoB.

Thd ilMom^fi^Mflmf/'-^An thtyin tfi^lMttidwtiliif/arailMb'FiUttt't No ; not one.
^ hock at this cheque of 375^; had Pidiaer an wicotiAt'WUh. you §k •tN B«g«ey
Bank At the time that cheque Was dnvwa? Ha had^r^Waa tholr oheqne pM asto fcmt
bank to hii credit? I cannot tell; the book is ia coniit ; Icaaowly ^rore Mttitting h.

WILLIAM CHESHiRB, «W(mi.--*^nnitiied by thft Attbrn^-OentraL'

Are you a clerk in the Natiohal Ptovincild Bank kt Bngplejr ? thfive been, but I am
not at present. — ^Were you so In the ihonth of September last ?[ Yes.— Had William
Palmer an accouiit with the bank ? H(i had, — Wd9 that cheque ^A into y6ur ba^k : did
you receive it? I received that cheqtte. — ^Frotn whon> ? Henry Coctilyne.— Who is he?
A groom of Palmer's.— Was that Cheque carried io Pahnei^s credit? If was.-7-l Wieve
your bank received the proeeeds ? YeiJ. ' ,

Cros^^aamined by Ur« 8erj€ont BhcM.

Did yon know Mr. Cook a4.aU at the hank?. I d^ oeil;/«*-Herhad.Bo>tiaiisactioa8 with
you? No. . ....../ ... ■■<

Mr. PRATT recalled.— Cross-examined by Mr. Serjeant Sh'ee.

Now, I call your attention i^rst to. the la^t transaction which has been mentioned;, but the
earliest one m date of May 1S55 — in May 1865« previously to that first transaotion yon
knew nothing at all about Cbok? Nothing whatever.-^But you had, I believe, a sum of
3\0l. in your hands due to Paln&er ? X had.-rABd Palmer wished you to add to that a sum
of 190^ to pay a sum of 500/. to a peraon of the name of Sargeht ? Exactly. — And you
decliiked to do that Vithoat farther security ? Yes. — And he then proposed the security of
Cook ? An aoceptanoe of Cook.-— Bid you then make inquiries about Cook ? No, I made
no inquirie8.----And did het wpresenft Cook at that time to be a gentlemait-of respeetability
and s]abst^<9e? Yi^r^^-Asi^ npon hii repcsasniation yoa acreed toaocept abilLdrawii by him
on Coek Ibr 200/.^ ab^* tp disooant it ? Yes^^And so he got the 5001. that he waatwl?
Yes^-rdid/Cook ever complain to you that he did not receive any money on that snortgage
thinsaotion^ of lus,,tVo race-^horses? I never saw Cook. — Did he complain by letter?
By letter neithen-^You had a communieation by letter with Oooik ; I do not mean as to
tliat transaction? On the first transaetkm I wrote hitn, sending him tfa^ 200/« aoeeptaace.
— And just befbre his death did you not write to him» calUng on him for payment ? Yet .-^
Have you the letter? No, I have not a copy of it. — >You held a bill of his, did yon not,
for 200/. which you had discounted? No, the SOO/. was paid in July by Cook, and I
nstimed liim the aoceptaaee.^-^But yt)u wrote to him just before he died ? I wit>te to lum,
I think it was on the Idth bf November.-^Was it not later ? No, I think not^ remindhig
him that the 500/. was due on the 2nd Deoember.^Yoa tent that to Ltmorwonh ? Yes.
— ^And that letter you directed how ? I addressed it to Lutterworth. — Do you know a
Mr. Jones of Lutterwortii, care of Mr* Jones? No, I do not, I simply addressed it to
Lutterworth*

He^eitamined by the JitorMy^OeneraL

'"Hiefii^t iriM>l. Wl was not paid when it Was due, was itt It was due, I think, on the
29th of June, and it was not paid: after that I wrote to Mr. Cook for payment.— Did
Mr. Ctooik aftefwards come up? He came np anfl' paid it himself.— Oft the 2nd of July?
Oniihe 2ttd of July r I was not in the way.— Ton did not see him yoilrself ? I did not see
him wh^tti^e SCO/, was paid. ' ' ,

' Vity^erjednt ^h6e. — Do you happen t6 know "how Mr, dook andt'almer stood as to the
winnings on the'Shreirsbury r&Ces? I haVe not the slightest notion.

JOHN 4.9MSHAW a^orn.-r-lE:;ua»^^ by Mr. Welab^,
■. I believe you are an accountant in practice at Bugelej? Yes.— On the 12th of
November last were you employed to applyj to Falineif for the payment of a debt? On or
about the 1 $2^, — ^Whatwas ihe sum, do, you .remember? About 60/. — ^Due to whom?
Mesisrs, Honk'^ns and Sown.— What arfll they ? Mercers and drapers at Bugeley.— I
believe 6n tne i^^ of. that sam^ njpnth ^pu sent, up jn8tnicitiona.for a writ ? I did.— On
the ipllowing i^iorning^ ttie 20w, did^ ftown s'eh4,,you to l^almer? Yes,— Did you go to
the prisoner, to hi^ house ? Yes.-^Did'he pay ypn any money? Yes, — How much?
Two 60/. notes.— Did he say anything abpUt tfiem ? . No/ it was in satisfaction of the debt,
—Did he iiy sdf Y^ ; 'dnd he hoped tney would hot make him pay the costs.— What
notes were they ? One a Bank of Enjdand note, and the other a local note.— I believe
you took the money to y6ur empldyer IroWn, forlfim to give the change and to settle with
the prisoneff about the costs? Yes^ ij took the money, and told him to go and take the
change and receipt and settle with him about the costs*

. Cross-examiaed by Mr* Serjeani Bhee,
at time in the day was this? 6 or 9 ifeHo^ ill tho noiaivg.

:u <ik;

DMi km» 2«^ liM. im

JMie««)yMiflMra^«eliei^flt Rug^leyf Te#.~>Do ^(m reittetiiber on the 12th of
NoremlMnr 'liut, ifu A' Blobdiiy/ PahkH^r't man, Bi^tes, comitis^ to you to f^eh yon to
Palaierifi ¥Mr;>rdd am r«Ml6ct W6 dl^ of thd nibnth, Imt'ltwas on a Monday .^^aa
it before Mr* Cook, dMt? It wai tiio SMMHrsbtsy «acd"iP^k.->--lii coAaequenee did you
go to Pftlmer's ^ouqe ? I did-«^Did you see him there P Ye».— What did he say to

it you again on S$tuT<laj mojiixii^- jumI i& did so, — Did he say anythiog about Shrews-
bury on thai occasion? He said ^e should receWe some money or ^ee a fellow at
Shrewsbury, and he would give it me again on Saturday morning. — t believe you met
him in the street on the &itarday ? Yesj '1 skw him ac^d^ntaHy on the Saturday mom-
i«g.>«-^nd-ke dotiMd'y^ulo IfiolkfW'hWa to hitf'iioiil^, did lf« not? Yes.— Did you go?
Yes.— Did he pay you the money ? Yes. — ^What In ? I cannot exactly say.

Cross-examined by Mr. Serjeant She^, .......

Has Palmer lent you money sometimes? Yip«,7-Frequei>tly ? Ye$, when I have
asked him he has never refused me ; we were always o(i ^lap^j^ tenfas^ — Mriu Palmer,
the mother, lived in the town? Yes. — In a,largeho^se iiear i}^ Qhuic!).? Tq*.— Do you
know whether the prisoner was in the habit of going there? . Xes, frequeDtly.-^You. havjo
seen him go in there ? _ Yes, — Many time« a-w^ek ? 1 qo^14 »ot p^y that.^-^fteu ? I
kve walked up with him when he nas been going the^e. . . ....

JOHN SPILSBURY swofo.-^Ewanlttfldtfy.Mr. Bi>dkin,

What ape you? A fermer. — Where dd you reside ? Near Statfbrd.*— Had you deal-
ings with the prisoner, Palmer ? Yes.-*lB Novembeir last was he iti your debt ? Tes. —
To what amount ? 46/. 3«. — Did you call upon hite on Thursday, the 22ud of Novembor;
at his hcmse f yes.-^Aiid did hepay yeu uien the amount you mentioned ?' Yes. — How
did he pay ytm ? With a Baok of England note for 502.--*>Did yon go to him on that day
hy api^ohitaieiity or did you eall oasually? I called casuaHy.— Had you ii^plied to him
for the moB^ heftire that ? No, I beUcYO not. '

Cross-examined by Mr. Serjeant Shec,

I dare say he had owed you more money than that on previoue occasions ? No.**rHad
he dealt with you long ? That was the tot transaction I ever had with him.

Mr^ 8TRAWBRID6E recalled^-^Bxamiaed by the Ati&mey-9eneral

Can yon tell me what was the state of Palmer's account with your bank on the l^tU .
of November ?

Mr. SerjeafU Shee* — What »re yo^ in, the \mk? MaoAg^r.^-Have you the books
here ? I have ^ copy of ^l^e account, which I examii^ed myself, but I ism f PAik Sfit^
timely viiHout the copy. ^ . * . ,

The ^^^onx7j^«^m/*a/,-— tW you can tell me what mat t^e atate of .hi»««Q(iiiDt onr
w»el9th:Qf NQv^uil>er2 , 9/^ 6«. in hia. favour. — Did he pay in. any mon^> about that*
period or shortly after that ? No^^-Was nothing paid to the credit of hie aoeoiwt-a^q-
that time ? No.-t-Hqw long had that been Uie .eoikdition of his account ? The last pay-
ment to the credit of his accotjint -jras on th^ 10\]l O^toVer, ppj, j before|,J think, the 5Q/.
was paid in, the account WM creditor. ' ' " .

HKRBERT WTRIGHT sworn.— Examined by Mr. Jameg.
I believe you are a soHoitof, iii pdrtaeTshlpl with your brftther at Birmingjiam ? h

^•— About hoTjr Iqpg h|ve yo^i k<iowi\ fairer, Jh^.pri^i^r? J[«ly, 185i, since thai
r^^^jt vj .,.•-, . . vr „ .^_- . -^hatsum? ,Hewa«.

^rap^rty? J had.—
, , — ^ ,^ ^. ^^^ .^ ,„^ — ^ ^,. msflwotjwjr.'-'fi it execut^^d. ^

mmer? It is.— It is dated the 5th of 'May, 1855, jpurporUng to be made between. Wil-j
liam Palmer of the one part and SdnFia ^rig^t <*f Birmingham, of ^l^e qther : were there
JJ»y race-h6rses assigned ? There wer^.-!— Was i{ 'j^n ^.l^cJ^fe r)ijl qf pW of aj\ h© had ?
tertainly, subject to redemption'. '' .' ' " .••..,'.(• -" ,-■ <
Mr. ^e/y>a/i^5Aec.— Withapowe^of^aije? ..'i^itkjaapvi?]^^? qf »»le, ....
r^^J' ♦^«»»«s.— 1 see the hordes he h^d,ai^Ji^.the apWlulel y^(kr*YQO tay this sum^
juich this bill of sale was to secure* ij^d bp^ advapced.UPOB. bilU? I do.— All the
advances, I think, were made upon bills? Certainly.— The existing debt of 1600/,, at
viVa""* 10,400/. more advanced: in fhct, did the whole d^bt consist of advances on
^^^' Certainly j toge4(her'wilb tWlerteeuritieei— flare you any of those bills? • The^

are all here.— Do they purport to be aiscepted by nMMr»mMkeiff—MB^v[^xtpbkt^kn}i

1854, to the 12th of Oc^>b9r.T7nTh^f)^illN» .hiilft.lO 4he /FWiv^TttMimU 99il»PR^ ^^
theacceptaijces of Sarah Palmar; tha^ka W wU<ihiy(^,mYgn.f!^tff^^
the execution of th^ hill of sale, a^ift t)}4,lift'ba;^ty^<^ef9^)J(^^ ^.^j^.^rr

That is the sum specified there to he aavanced r That was so ; and there is the ft(;m)yt;
ance of William Palmer for 1600/.. niaking with the. bills tou have the lO,4O07.— ijfoir,
during the months ofOctoter 'iiia^NoVeWwri^HH^''^iih'^^

the payment of those bills? Not daring the month of October. — Were Y6ti"'in'']^<i^
vember? The eariy pm <S§ No^^mb^.^Mb«y df th^h %i!»'iii4il<$M*<#&i J^due
remained over-due, and no renewals were Ijik^ ki'^^^Hy^^ &MUM^?<^^TUt^'^
so as between Palmer and my , brother ; thi^ i^on^y ^bs npt ^oiu^dered to be dae
until the Cambridgeshire Newmarkdt MeetlAg*^ terminated. -^ When was that? I
should say the money was due the first or second week in November. — Had he pro-
posed to pay then ? He always said that was the time at which the money would be
paid. — That is at the latter end of October ? At the latter end of October, or some time
in the early part of November ; I would rather say, if you please, the first or second week
in November ; I do not consider that 1 was entitled to ask for payment earlier.— But,
before the 20th of November, had you pressed him for payment ? Certainly. — ^Did you
put this bill of sale in force in December ? I did. — On what day ? I hardly remember
the -day ; it was after the verdict had been returned ; the coroner's verdict. — ^Were you
yourself present when his property was taken ? I was. — Did you take any papers of his
at all ? Certainly not. — Or find any papers ? I did not.

Cross-examined by Mr. Serjeant Sfae,

Was.an auctioneer sent down to seise ? A sheriff's officer. — ^Did an auctioneer go
with him? The auctioneer followed after the seizure had been effected. — And you took
possession of a good deal of property there ? That was so. — You say you were pressing
him ; you did not object to putting the thing off, and taking the interest ? There was
never such a proposal.— You would not if there had been? I hardly know what I should
have done. — ^That would depend on the amount of interest; you know very well yon
would not have objected to let the thing go on a little longer, holdine the security ?
Probably not, if money had been forthcoming. — You were friciadly with him ? I was not
hostile. — I believe you had also upon his introduction accommodated Mr. Cook? Cer-
tainly not. — ^At no time ? Oh no. — I ask you the fact whether you had upon his intro-
duction accommodated Mr. Cook with nioney? Certainly not; I had offered to do it,
but the transaction never assumed completion. — ^How long before Mr. Qook's death did it
ftiil to assume completion ? Mr. Cook saw me, I believe, on the 14th of September.

Be-examined by the Attorney-General,
What amount of interest would have been payable on the renewal of this amount;
what rate of interest? My friend asked you whether, supposing Palmer had proposed to
you to renew this security or carry it on without renewal, wheAer, on the pajnment of
interest, you would have consented to do so ? Yes, if the interest had been forthcoming.—
I want to know what would have been the amount ? These bills were discounted at 60
per cent, per annum. — ^If they had been to be renewed, would it have been the same rate
of interest ? Very likely. — ^At all events, not much less ? I do not think that is likely.

Mr. STRAWBBIDGE recalled.— Examined by Mr. Jajnes.

Look at these acceptances to the bills produced by Mr. Wright j are they Mrs. Sarah
Palmer's ? Certainly not.

Cross-examined by Mr. Serjeant Shee,

Have you any of Mr& Sarah Palmer's handwriting here ? I have not — ^Is this very
different from it ? Yes, certainly. — ^You know it at once not to be ? I know it is not
her writing. — It is an imitation of it? It is an imitation, but a very fiunt imitation.--'
It could not deceive you for a minute ? Certainly not ; I should not pay cheques signed
in that way.

The Attorney-Genial said that Mr. Wetherby was the only remaining witness for fte
prosecution, and, as he was not now in court, he hoped their Ix>rdships would allow hitn
to be examined in the morning, before his learned friend opened the defence.

Mr. Serjeant Shee asked the Court to permit the witness Mills to be recalled, in order
that he might examine her as to where she was now residing.

The Attorney-General, — She was cross-examined upon that point.

Lord Campbell. — ^We are of opinion that there is no ground for recalling her.

Mr. Serjeant .Shee asked permission to put some further queitions to Dr. Devonshif^
with regard to his having been pushed by Palmer during the post-mortem examinatios.

ifflxraiDjn; ju^ ao,< i866j 171

Mhioh flfii)^tttii«ii oMS he'ttttuthtiAy he Had not pkenk a tote ^ H.

^Ir. Bi^!i!ii^'Ai;i;^ii^6if d:m4^^ similar bpipidn.,' lliere was nothing extraordinary
in a'bersbn ^Ti6 wtt^'^teri^ted iii'tb^ '^JcainiukHon 'beinfi' anxioua to see all that was

Mr iSr^i^^an^ /^i^^jalt^ tlu^t ^n^m^itiion, qi tnei^ LQrdaliifs apiuoo^ would not press
hU request./ . . ' // * . ". , ,* " ' , . . ' ' .» '.'../

1^4 C}A¥PlPv|:fI«/hop^ thft^ the iiMy.'vo«lil.,ha.v<r a» (^^rtimity gtren them of

i>i'j(^atbiffTthefr«fj^,aMtlMlt.^e^mi>g^ -• ' - i.t *

> '•(( 0/ II . I'l',
I ^■ ' p • I •

' III . W / , I «1 . * |l ' •/ T- ' ' • '/ • ' , ' . t

, . ; ,/ , jtfiCfpouri q^Jmmkd, ai haff-pfmi 3 . miH X6 , ^c/eci fe-mpnpic.

• t •.

. I - ! . r • • . . • ; . ■ .

■ ' ; . , • • > • » . ■ . . J. y . . ■. / •

' - ». I

I

T •. .

1 IL •

I \

f

< 1 , 1 i| r I I J I , • ' ' ■ • I , r • ' iM > I t I I , <

, • . 1 1 • , • ! ' t 1 ■ , . 1 . • i I ^ , ^ ■ • • ' ' I ! 1 . • // I ;. • ■ •".<;■ 1 1

• .' i; ' •< ' ' 'I' ' • ' .' •' . • •' < '. *l '•<'.•''•• I. '^ [

' :... II .^. >•.'./'■''- • • • *« '.> i' . " •<! ' • !•■ ;

,1 • I 111- > ' >. <.;. • '.If' » ... ■ ^_ ■ • ■' * ' . ' . u ' i '

' .?/ ; ' ' .,t ;,. ./ \. f . .'•• ,' < : . lit / ' ' " ' /

■' ' i > •- tK {'f i' ••. 'tl '• '■ ^- »
' • -i'. i '4 I •• J s.^.i'-it •■'■ I'.. • . I ." ' .--K 1'^ y :/. liO/ •♦/ill

. -4 '. '.ii^r jH. 1 '! ,. .' ,^ • / ": •' uii>;": rirn if il*

. ♦ J ^ 1 , '. ♦t^ »'^ HI vrjT ♦ > J - 1 -J.' Mil ?r ' ,! •,

< . ' 1

NOTICE.

• •

I I

.1. ' '

f '. 1.

/

K O T I B.

'. /'

/ I

• , <

In eoDgequtnee «f the mpreeedeiiled length of this Trial, the
Fubli£]i»e]:s find it wholly impcauble to issue the verbatiin Report
for One ShSIing as announced. It will therefore be published in
two Parts. Hie Evidence iot the Prosecution, price One Shilling.
The Eridenee for the Defence and Judge's sununing up, which ib
expected to occupy about the same number of pages as this Part,
also price One Shilling.

Thirteen, P^^gtage Stamps sent to the Publisher mil secure
Part II. post free.

.1

I ' 1 < ■

■ I

SEVENTH DAY'S TEIAL.

May 21, 1856.

The Attorney-General said, before Mr. Serjeant Shee commenced his address, with tlie
permisAon of the Court he widied to ask two or three questions.

CHASLE& WETHEBBT recalled.— Examined by Mr. WeU^y,

Ton said, when yon were examined the other day, that on ^e 21st of November yon
received a letter from the pnaoner enclosing a cheque for 350/. ? I did. — I think you did
not produce tluit letter on that occasion ? 1 was not adced for it. — ^It is dated Novembef
20th, 1855, from William Palmer; did you receire, on the morning of the 23rd, another
letter from the prisoner ? Yes.

CrosK'examined by Mr. Serjeant Shiis.

You know the hand-writing of Mr. Cook ? Yes. — That cheque was written by hini ?
—As fiir as I recollect it was.

The Attorney-General. — Was ypur attention particularly drawn to it? No ; it was not.
—Have you any recollection whether it was signed J. P. Cook, or J. Parsons Cook ?
No ; I have not.

Lord Campbell. — ^Did you examiilQ tie ^iun^w^ing ? Not particularly ; I observed
the body of the cheque was not in Cook's nand-writing.

Mr. Serjeant ^SAe^.-n-When that cheque was presented, you had not funds of Mr. Cook's
in hand to moAt it? No. — ^ITiey were afterwards sent up by Mr. Frul, the clerk of the
coirrse at Shrewsbury ? I ^peoted tp have veedifstt • thc«t.-4 WeaM ilteryv- «kot . eventually
sent? N». — ^In the ordinary course of things, ought they to have been there qn the
% appointed : supposing that Mr. Frail had ftiiy rironey ^s^ctiA-kW^e-dc^iArse to pay to
Mr. Cook, ought they, in the or^Unary course of things, to haye. be^i^ f^ere o^i th^ day
you received the cheque ? That I cannot answer absoltitfely ; thfe Vjle^lcs of thte course at
the diffiarent nwses, when they have to settle acoouata with ^t .0^e do it is|n»ediately,
and some take a few days ; there is no time that the money ought to have l>een there. —
But, in t^usoal course, if he had any claim upon it, he might doduel^whht claim he
ha4 ? It was a week after Mr. Cook had won, and Mr. Cook might reasonably suppose
it would hat^e been in hand at that time: I cannot tell you firiiy mdi^^.-^YoU ilifbrmed
Mr. Palmer, when you did not pay his cheque, the reason for.. not j^V-ying it? Yes. —
Did he afterwards insist that you should not part with the money to anybody else?
Yes, in a notice. -

JOHNSON ROGERSON PUTLER sworn.— Examked by the Attomey-Oeneral.

I believe you attend races, atnd bet upon commission ? I .do 2 — Wete you |it tl^e
Shrewsbury races ? Yes. — Had you an account there to settle with Palmer ? I had. —
How did the accounts stand : what had you to receive or pay to him ? I had to
receive. — ^How much had you to receive from Palmer ? About 700/. — ^Was that money that
you had to receive frx>m him in respect of bets that you had made for him at previous
races ? At Liverpool. — You had backed horses for him at Liverpool ? Yes.

Lord Campbell. — ^Bets you had made for him and paid ? Yes.

The Mtomey'GeneraU — Had you any money to receive from him in respect of the
Shrewsbury races ? No. — Did you endeavour to get your money at Shrewsbury ?^ I did.
—And did you get any ? I got 40/. — Did he give you any reason for not paying you
iQore : what passed between you ? I asked him if he would let me have some money,
and he said he had none, that he had some to receive. — Did he tell you how much he
had to receive ? No. — ^Did anything else pass ? Yes ; he 'gave me a cheque for 260/* —
Upon what bank ? The Rugeley bank.— Was the cheque paid ? No.— Have you ever
got the money ? No. — Did you know Mr. Cook's horse Polestar ? Yes.— What, in yom-
judgment, was Polestar worth after she won the race at Shrewsbury ? About 700/. after
she had won. — Would she have been worth more before she won ? Yes. — ^You mean
with her engagements 1 suppose ? Yes.

Cross-examined by Mr. Gro^e,

Did you receive any money for Palmer on Polestar ? Yes. — ^Did you keep that ?
l^d. ^

' Mr. STEVENS recalled.-— Examined by Mr. James,

Was the mare Polestar sold at Tattersall's ? She was.— When ? The 10th of March
last,--Sold by auction ? Yes ; for 720 guineas.

The Attorney' General, — That is the case for the prosecution.

M

174 THIAL OF WILLIAM PALMEK.

THE DE^ElSrCE,

Mr. Serjeant Shee, — May it please your Lordships : Gentlemen of the Jury :— I
should pity the man who could rise to perform the task which it is now my duty to
attempt, unoppressed by an overwhelming sense of diffidence and of apprehension.
Once only beiore has it fallen to my lot to defend a fellow-creature upon trial for his
life ; it is a position, even if the effort should last but for a day, of a nature to disturb
the coolest temperament and try the strongest nerves ; how much more so when, daring
six long days, in the eye of my unhappy client, I have been standing between him and
* the scaffold ; conscious that the least error of judgment on my part might consign him
to a murderer's doom, and that through the whole time I have had to breast a storm of
public prejudice such as has never before imperilled the calm administration of justice !
Gentlemen, it is useless for me to conceal what you luiow perfectly well, what vour
utn^ost endeavours cannot wholly have effaced froni your recollection, that lor six long
months, under the sanction and upon the authority of science, an opinion has universally
prevailed that the voice of the blood of John Parsons Cook was crying up unto us from
the ground, and that that cry was met by the whole population under an impression and
conviction of the prisoner's guilt in a delirium of horror and indignation by another
cry of " blood for blood !" You cannot have failed to have entered upon the discharge
of the duties, which you have, as I have observed, most conscientiously endeavoured to
perform, without having been to a great extent influenced by that cry ; you could not
know that it would be your duty to sit in that box to pass between the Crown and the
prisoner ; you may with perfect propriety, understanding that the facts had been ascer-
tained before a coroner's jury, and reading such evidence as was there taken, have formed
an opinion upon the question of the guilt or innocence of the prisoner ; but you cannot
but know that whatever that opinion may have been it is now your duty to discard it,
at least until you have heard the evidence on both sides.

Gentlemen, the very circumstances under which we meet in this case are of a
character to excite mingled feelings of encouragement and alarm. Those whose duty
it is to watch over the safety of the Queen's subjects felt so much apprehension le^ the
course of justice should be disturbed by the popular prejudice which had been excited
against the prisoner, so much alarmed that an unjust verdict might in the midst of that
popular prejudice pass against him, that a resolution was taken, not only by the Queen's
Government and the legislature, upon the motion of the noble and learned Judge, who
presides here, in the House of Lords, that an Act of Parliament should be passed to pre-
vent the possibility of the ordinary forms of law being, in the case^of William Palmer,
made the instrument of popular vengeance. The Crown, under the advice of its respon-
sible ministers, resolved also that this prosecution should not be left in private hands,
but that its own law-officer, my learned friend the Attorney-General, should take upon
himself the' responsibility of conducting it properly, at once sternly in his duty to the
public and fairly to the prisoner at the bar ; and my leaned friend, when that duty
was intrusted to him, did what 1 must say will, in my opinion, for ever redound to his
honour : he insisted that in a case in which so much prejudice had been excited all the
evidence which it was intended on the part of the Crown to press against the prisoner
should, as soon as he received it, be communicated to the prisoner's counsel ; everything
I must say, and tell my unhappy client, everything which the constituted authorities
of this land; everything which the legislature and the law-officers of the Crown could
do to secure a &ir and impartial trial in this case, has been done, and the whole respon-
sibility, if unhappily injustice should on either side be done, now weighs with terrible
pressure upon my I#ord and upon you.

Gentlemen, one great misfortune has befallen the accused ; a most able man who
had been selected by him as his counsel many weeks ago has been unfiortunately by
illness prevented from discharging that duty to him ; I have endeavoured, to the utmost
of my ability, to supply his place ; I cannot deny that I am awed — ^that I am moved—
by the task I have undertaken ; but the circumstances to which I have already adverted,
the national effort, so to speak, through the government of the country, to insure a fair
trial is a great cause of encouragement, and I am not dismayed. I have this further
cause for not being altogether overcome by the duty which I have of defending the
prisoner and of discussing the maSs of evidence which has been laid before you, that
though of course, like everybody else, I knew generally and loosely, very loosely indeed,
the history of these transactions at Rugeley, I had formed, when the papers came into
my hands, no opinion upon, them, no opdnion upon the guilt or the innocence of the
prisoner at the bar, and my mind was perfectly free to form what I trust will be declared
by you a right judgment in this case. I commence his defence, I say it in all sincerityi

SEVEKTH DAT, May 51, 1856. 175

npitih an entire oonviction of his.jsnocenoe. I boUeve that -^tere nemv was a ^ruer
irofd proncKiDced than tlie wcHrds which he pronoaaeed wiiea he said '* Not guilty " to
this eluirge. If I fail in establishing that to your satiefaetion I shail be nodier a great
misgifing that my failure was mor« attrihutable to my own inability to do justice to
this caselhan to any weakness in the case iUelf ; and I will give you this proof of the
sincerity with which I declare upon this evidence my conviction of his innocence, that
I will meet the case of the prosecution foot to foot at every stage. I will grapple with
■every difficulty which has been suggested by my able friend the Attorney •General. You
shall see that I avaid bo point because I fail to approach it» and if yoii fipd that I do
thus deal fairly with you from the beginning, and it is my duty to do so, I hope I may
be sare, indeed I Inow I may be sure, of a wiiling and considerate attention to an address
Which must, I fear, be long, but in which there shall be no observations, no tone, and
no topic of discussion, which do not properly belong to the case.

Gentlemen, the case -which the Crown undertakes to establish against the prisoner
at the bar, and to support by entirely circumstantial evidence is, or may be, shortly
stated thus : they say that the prisoner having in the second week in November made
up his mind that it was his int^est to get rid of John Parsons Cook, deliberately pre-
pared his body for deadly poison by'the slower poison of antimony, and afterwards
dispatched him by the deadly poison of strychnia. No jury will convict a man of the
crime thus Imputed to the -prisoner, unless in the first place it be made clear that he had
some motive for its commission, some strong reason for desiring the .death of Cook ;
imless, in the seccfid place, the Symptoms of the deceased before death, and the appearance
presented by his body after death, were consistent with the theory of death by strychnia
poison, and inconsistent with the theory of death from other and natural causes ; unless,
tfeindly, the circumstantial evidence against him is such as to be inexplicable upon the
sopposition of his innocence. Now, it is under these three heads that I intepd to discuss
the evidence that you have heard ; and it must he plain to you, that if I adhere to that
Older and method of treating the vast amount of proof which has been laid before you,
I must exhaust the whole argument, and leave myself no chance without immediate
detection of evading any difficulty in the defence.

Before, however, I proceed to grapple in these close quarters with the case of the
Crown, as made by the Attorney-General, allow me, that you m^y at once see the whole
scope of the address with which I have to trouble you, to claim its proper place in
the discussion for a fact which, though by no means concealed from you by the Attor-
ney-General, yet appeared to me in that ad^dress by which he at once seized upon
your jodgmenr, t^ have been thrown too much into the shade, the fact that strychnia
was not found in the body of John Parsons Cook. If he died from the poison of
strychnia, he died within two hours of the admijaistration to him of a very strong dose
of it — he died within a quarter of an hour or 20 minutes Qf the effects of that dose
being visible in the convulsions of his body ; the post-mortem examination took place
withm six davs of his death — there is not the least reason to suppose that between the
time of the mgestion pf the poison, if poison was taken, and the paroxysm in which
he died, there was- any dilution of it in the stomach, or any ejection of it by
vomiting. Never, therefore, were circumstances more &vonrable ; unless the science
of chemical analysis is altogether a failure for detection of Hie poison of strydhnia,
never was there a case in which it ought to have been so easy to pi'oduce it. Now, the
fact is, and it is bevoaad all 'question, that it was :not found. Whatever we may
think of Dr. Alfred Taylor, of his Judgment and of bis disct'etion, we have no reason
to doubt that he is a skilful analytical chemist — we have not the least reason to sup-
pose, we know the contrary, that he and Dr. Kees, who assisted him, did not do
all that the science of chemical ajialysis could enable man to do to detect the poison
of strychnia. They had distinct information from the executor and near relative of
the deceased, either personally or through his solicitor, that he, for some ca.use or other,
had reason to suspect the poison of strychnia ; they undertook the examination of the
stomach, which, I think, upon the whole evidence, without adverting to that part of it
now in detail, you will be satisfied was not in an unfavourable condition for a sufficiently
accurate analysis ; with the expectation that if strychnia had been taken it would be
*nind, and without .any doubt as to the efficiency of their .tests to detect it ; and yet in
their letter of the 4th of December they say—" We do not find strychnia, prussic acid,
or any trace of it; from the contents of the stomach having been drained away, not
tamed out of the jar, it is impossible t© say whether any strychnia had or had not
been given just betbre death, but it is quite possible for tartar emetic to destroy life,
if given in repeated doses ; and, as far as we can at present form an opinion, in the
absence of any natural cause of death, the deceased may have c^ed from the effects of
antimony in ibis or some odier form.'' Having afterwards attended the inquest, and

M 2

176 TRIAL OF WILLIAM PALMER.

heard the eridence of EliE>1i«th Mills and Mr, Jones of Lntterworth, and the evidenw of
a person uf the name of Roberts, wboipoke to the i>nrcbace of strychnia poison by Paliner,
on the morning of the Tuesday, Dr. -Taylor came to the conclnslon that the pills which
■were administered to Cook on the Monday and Tnesdaj night ^nfained Btrychnia, and
that Mr. Cook was poisoned by it; and he came to that conclusion, though he had eipresscd
an opinion in writing that he might— and these are his Tery wcwds— -naTC been poisonei
by antimony, of wbick some trace was found by him in the body, while uo Race wu
found of Btrycbnia.

Gentlemen, I am not about to discuss that part of the <;a.Be in detail, but I call
jour attention to it for the purpose of claiming for it its [iroper place lo this dis-
cnEsion, and that yon may know at the comraen cement of ni^- address ^htt the whole
course of my. argument will be, and not be ander the impression tba.t, because I do uot
under the three heads to which I have directed your atlejilloii advert particularly lo
that head, I btend to pass it over. I tell jou exactly what the ease for the defence
wiU be, a> to ih« point that strychnia wai not found in Mr. Cook's body. Let me slate
it as feirly as I can : the gentlemen who ha?e come lo the conctnsion that etrjchnia
may hate been there, though they did not find it, have arrived at that cooolusion \tj
eipcrimenls of a very partial kind Indeed ; they contend that the pcuson of strychnia i!
•fthat nature, that when once it has done its fatal work, and become absorbed into the
system, it ceaaes to be the thing which it was wheir it was taken into the system { U
becomes decomposed, its elements separated from each other, and IhtTefore no longec
capable of responding to the tests which, according to them, would certainly detect vie
poison of nndecompiuted stiychnia ; that is thejr case. They account for the tact tliat
11 was not found, and for their slill relaJniog the belief that it destroyed Mr, Cook, by
that hypothesis. Now it is only an hypothesis [ there is no foundation for it la
eiperiment; it is not supported by the evidence of any eminent toxicologisl but
themselves : it is due to them to say, and to Dr. Taylor in particular to say, becanV
it will he quite out of my power to speak of Dr. Christison through any part of thil
discussion except with the respect and consideration which is dne to a man of eminent
acquirements and of the Iiighesl character ; it is due to Dr. Taylor to say that he does
propound that tbeotj in his book, hut he propounds it as a theory of his own ; he docs
not vouch, as I remember, any eminent toiicologist in suwwrl of itj and when wfl
recollect that his knowledge on the matter consists — good humane roan-! — ^in having
poisoned five rabbits 25 years ago, and five since this question of the guilt or innocence
of Palmer arose, his opinion', I think, unsupported by the opinions of others, cannot
haiemueh weight with you; however, what I have to say now upon that point is,
that I win call hefbre you many gentlemen of the highest eminence in their profession,
inalylieal chemists, lo slate lo joa their utter renunciation of that theory. 1 willcal^
before you Mr. Nunneley, a Fellow of the Royal College of Surgeons, and Professor of
Surgei'y at the Leeds School of Medicine, who attended that case of strychnia poison
(hat took place at Leeds, and to which we have agreed that no reference sha.U be made
by name! 1 will call before you Dr. Williams, Professor of JlaUria Medica at the
Kojal College of Surgeons in Ireland, and surgeon ibr 18 years to the City of Dublia
Flofpital, wbo will tellyou that he also entirety rejects that theory, and believes that it
has no fiiiindatibn in experiment or anthority. I will call before you Dr. Letheby, one
of itie ablest and most distingnished among the men of science, lu thfg great city,
ProfeiiBor rtf raiemistrv and Toxicology in the . Medical College of the London Hospital,
Health 0? the City of L:Ondon, wbp also rejects that theotp- as a
belief of (cientiBc men. I will call before you Dr. Nicholas
'Physiciang, a pbysifciin of (he London Hospital, and Professor
dtunon, who 'oomjars with DrI Lethehy in his opinion ; Dr.
yal College of Physicians ; Mr, Rogers, Professor of Chemistry
and lastly I will call before you probably the most eminent
county, Mr. Wniam Hurapath, of Bristol, who totally rejects
ttwortliy of ci^dence': all' of these gentlemen contending, and
h^roafiis, that not only if half a grain, or the fiftieth part of a
Will go on to say, that if 5, or 10, or 80 limes less than that
to the hitman .^ard'e at all, it. could be and must be detected
itag ; the]|"vill tell ypnthii^ notas the result of a iay'e ci^elfj
ve rabbits, hut upon 'a Urge and tried e?Lperience upoa the
id created, as yon kiKrn'lhey were, for the hencGt of mankind-,
npan a very eitensive eiperiende in many cases, as lo many of them, of the effects
of strychnia on the human system; and not to detain yon on this part of the case, to
which I only now advert, not intending to press it on you later at any length, that yon.
may see what the nature of the defence in point of medical testimony will be, I ivill

^ . , J . , . .,,,.., S|:,Vpjj[THAAy,,MAy ^X,A^6. • 177

i^^F^ff?'* '^ evujence "v^hlch I Uiink must control your judgment, that the oply safe
fiQnd\!($}^(lfi {i);,wticJi you can arrive, is, that strychjaia not having been found in Coot's
^dj;Vjipier th€^ cjrcum^tances of thU case never could ha'v'^ been there. You will find
that'li^y,.all agree lu this ppiniop, that no degree of putrefaction or fermentation in
thti hiutlan i?ystewi could in iheir jud^ent so decompose the poison ef strychnia, as that
it should no longer possess those quanties wnich in its undecomposed state cause it tp
respond t(^ t^Jtepts which are u§ed for it^ 4^tection^

Having said so, n^uch|j w}|i now apj^l^ mysel? to'whatj,ih my judgment, is an equally
fflipQrta?it;,if,nbt'inore liiports^t, Question in this pase, one which I approach with no
diffidenpe wiiatever e^tc^j^t the distrust which ^ have, under the circumstances in which
I spealc, of mjselfj and wh^chj if it were possible for me to write what I think upon it
and then w res^d ' it io you, t do not entertain .tl^e smallest doubt that you must be con-
vjnced ot'me innocence ^f this man — the questipn whether, in the second week of
^^oyeiAberi 185$, lie' had a., motive for the commissiop ' of this murder, some strong
i;mon iQT desiring that Cook should die : I neyer will belieye that, unless it be made clear
to ypu that it was the interest of William Palmer, or that he thought it was his interest,
tqdesitroy Cook, — I never vill believe, till I hear your verdict pronounced, that a jury
pan coi^e to the conclusion of his guilt. And if seems to ine, upon the evidence whicn
aas been laid before you, abiinaantly clear that it not only was noli the interest of Wil-
lifMu. Palmer that Cook should die, but that his death was the very worst calamity that
eoujd h^fatl himy and that he could not possibly be ignoi*ant that if must be immecuately
Ibllowed.by bis own ruin. That it was followed by his immediate ruin we know. We
hioyr that at the time when he is said to have commenced to plot the death of Cook
he was in a condition of the greatest embarrassment. It was an' embarrassment which,
in its extreme intensity, had come but recently upon him, an embarrassment too in some
degree mitigated by the circumstance that the person upon whom these bills^ which have
been i^tated to you to be forgeries, purported to be drawn was his own mother, a lady of
jery large fortune, and with whom he was on the most affectionate terms. Still he was
h a condition unquestionably of great embarrassment. My learned frieiid has rsused
the hypothesis of his having a wish to destroy Cook upon the ground of this em-
barrassment. My learned friend stated to you that the case of the Crown against iJtie
prisoner was this : that " being, in desperate circumstances, with ruin, disgrace, and
punishment staring him in the lace, he took advantage of his intimacy with Cook, wheil
Cook had been the winner of a considerable sum of money', to destroy him and get
possession of his money." That is the theory of the Crown. Now; let us test it as a
matter of business, relieving if possible our minds _from the anxiety we must all feel
when the fate of a fellow-creature is at stake, as if it was a case in a private room for
the decision of an arbitrator. It is my misfortune not to be able at times tospeal; other-
wise than earnestly, but let us look at it as a matter of bjisiness and scrutinise, it in every
corner^ Was it his interest that in the second week ih November, 1855,' Mr. Cook
should be kyi^d by a railway accident? If it was not, we have no motive to ascribe to
it. If it was not, and more, if the contrary was clearly his interest, no sensible man
would belieye that he' delibei;ately plotted and committed the murder. ', A long correr
spondence has t)een put in, the material parts of which letters will, in a subseq^uent Sstaj^fc
crf'the case, be called to your attention., There is evidently a great deal in it that idoee
not touch the point in the case, but the learned. Judge, before the end of the cas^, will
direct your mind to a correct appreciation of the contents. I watched thiem "w^lth'ai^
anxiety which no words can e^xprese. Maving had the advantage, for whicn f 5bl,ali
ever honour my learned JEriemd,, jbf reading the correspondent beforehand, I fpui^q
the history, as told by thei correspondence, filled, iip hy the viv4 voce testimony wj^ch
was afterwards given. I was aware, at least t ^iVfAy believed, that ia thaj; correspond-
ence the innocence of the prisoner lay concealed;, ^d I. think that I,sha)il be a]^e tp
show you that it i& demonstrative ' of this proposition that he not only had po motive
to kill Cook, but that the death, of Cook w:as th^ very worst kind.of tting tBiat cpuld
bappen for him. I shall not apologise, tq jr'ou,^ you, yfould think it very iiiopportuhe to
do so, for going into the detiaiU of.tHis matjter. AUov me, coiifiniJig myself, as it
is my duty, to the evidence in the cau^e, to caU your attention to the position in which
these two men stood to each other. They tad beei?. intimate as gracing mends for two or
three years; they had had a great many transactions together j thev were jointly inte-
rested in at least one race-horse which was. traijiing at the stables oi Saunders at Hed-
nesford ; they generally stayed together at the same hotel ; they were seen together on
almost all the race-courses in the kingdom, and were known to be connected in betting
transactions, and adventurers upon the same horses at the same races. It is in evidence
that just before Cook's death ne said, in the presence of his friend Jones, addressing
Palmer, " Palmer, we have lost a great deal of money upon races this year." And

178 TRIAL OF WILLIAM PALMER,

thoogh it' u unpossible, Cook bt^og dead, and the Momth- of the prisoner sealiBd, and
transactions of this character do! being reoorded in regular books as the ti^ansactions in
a lAercbant's couuting-honse are, to giTe you in the fullness of ervidence the aotnal state
of their relartions to each other, yet it is abundantly oiear, and I will make it more clear
to you presently, that they irere very closely cenneeted. Wheo, in the jmonth of May,
1S55, money was wanted either by Mr. Cook or Paln»er» Palmer allied to Pratt f4Mr it.
He wanted, I think, ^00^. to make up asvoi foot the paymentof a-debt, he having^ I think,
a balance of 190/. in the hands of Pvatt. Mr. Pratt would not lend it lum without
security, and he proposed the secarity of his friend ^hn Favsons-Cook, a gentleman of
respectability and a maa of Euhstance.

Now, what the ex&et state of the affmrs/of John Parsons Cook at that time wos, I
do not know. Such a f<»taDe as he had might be threwB down in a week by the
coarse of fife that he was leading. A yowg man who is- reekless as to the mooe in
which he employs his &>rtnne, lutd who has only 13,000/., may if he likes £[>r a y^ar or
two pass before the world as a man of mnch m4>re considerable means ;■ it is noteTery-<
body who will go to Doctors' Commons to asceitain what the eatact- amount of property
be derived from his gnrndfather was. He was. Mr. Cook of Lutterworth, a gentleman
who had a stud of xAce-hocses, who limned expensively, and was known to haive inhented
a fertmse; be was a person whose firtendship w«s at that time probably, and psobably
•oontiDaed to be, a matter of o«asiderable eouventence to Palmer. You reoolleot,
genUemen, I am not defendiDg Palmer against the crime of forgery. I am- not
defendiagibim against the iieekless' improvidence of obtaining money txH the eiionDoas>
disoonntsittt w^di he obtained it* The question is, whetb^ he is gnilty of murder.
Palmer and Cook* were then so* circnmstaaeed as early as the month of May, 1855.
They had hMbancnhBrtcanflactioa previoaidy to the date of November, 1855, which I
will' not advest to- now, beoavse it was taken second' in the case of my learned friend^
the AttoKaey^^eneral ; but let us see what their position w«s in the second week of
I4ovember, 18>&5«t Ejecting that, we have the eiridence of Pratt, and from the;
correqKMidenoe which he explained to us, there can be no doubt upon onet minds.
Amongst a mass of haUs, amountiag altogether to 11,500/., which had been repeatedly
reaewed, there were two bills for 2000/. each, which became due in the lost week in Octo^
her; aftd there was another bill or two other bills amounting to 1500/. which had beeome
due some time- befc«e, but which were held over, as they say, from month to miHith;
Palmer, who was liable upon them, paying for the advantage of having then;! held over at
the end of every month, at what they cail interest of about 60 per cent. These three biUfi^
or sums of 2000/., 2000/., and 1 500/. were the embarrassments which were pressing upon him
in theseeond week of November ; and be it observed, though pFCssing upon him, they
were pressed i^nm him by a man, who no doubt would have been glad to have got the
ppriuoipal, bn^ who would also upon anything approaching to seaurity have been vei^
well pleased with the int^^st. How can capital, if it be secure, be. better employed than
at 4<K<or><ii0 per cent, per annum? As long as there was a- vestige, of g/ood securiity, Mr.
Pratt er Mr^ Pratt's clients desired nothing better than that Pahner^ should continue to
hold, the money* '

< 'Tl^w, in.thaA state o£ things, on the 27th of QctobOT, Palmer- in answer to an urgent
di»uand upon him for money on the ground of the secmrity becofiuiig doubtful, came up
ta {jondiKtf i and Pratt insisted that m xes{iiect of one of thoas bills of 2000/.. which
bed. just become dne, as Palmer c<mld not pay it, he shonld pcty installments upon it in
addition, to the enormous interest which he charged ( and it was agreed at that inters
view of the 22nd of Oc^biery that 250/. shQuld he paid down, 250/.. paid on i^^31st of
Ooto^R,. and .th9t, as soon after as possible, . a further sum of 300/^ should be paid, • making
in the whole a payment on account of that biU of $00/. to quiet Pratt,, or as Pratt stid, to
qfaji^st /his clients, .and induce- them to let .the bill stand over. On the 9ith of November
&at 300/. was ]¥»idy and when paid^ a- leik^r was writteoy which I beg your particular
attention to, sod ymi will see how closely and strongly it beamou' the point to which I
am now entreating your most> anxious covsideration-; a Letter of the 1 3th of November,
that i§ the day when JPpIestair won the lace, written by Pratt to Palmer, as follows :•—
*' Dear Sir, 'Curiously enough,. L $nd that the great peimli of. the office is, that ^oxa
brother had deUniwm> tremens more than once, say tmree or £our times before his life;
was accepted, and that actually their B^edical man^ Dr. Hastjngs, reported against the
life, as well as Dr. WardelL I think I shall be able to ^ a copy of tiae proposal throngh
a friend.'' Palmeir did not know what<the proposal was, and theiefore probably it had
been made by his bivthen '* The opinions df ssvenal secretaries of insurance offices ass,
that the Company have, not » leg to stand upon, and fr6m the mere, fact of the enonnsii^
nreminm, it is plain that the policy wasefBeoted on an extra rate of premium on -accouat

' the time statement of the. condition- otf health, of .the assured.. The enormous peS"

• SEVttNTH DAY, May 21, 1866. 179

niiam will go a great ^^y to giYctw a verdict/' — l do not like to read only one passage

fmn 8 letter, less by ehanee I should mislead, therefbre I have T€ad that portion of it ;

bttt now attend 10 this t — ** I eonnt most positively on seeing yon on Satarday ; do for both-

oar SBkes try to tnake urp ^ a&dnnt to a thousand poonds, far without i« I shall be onable

to renew the IftM. dtte oft' the dth." ^rhat does that mean? Prate told ^s yesterday

the three sdms of 900^., S50/., and 250/., and some other small amount, making up th^

sum of 800/., were histteknents payiiMe on the liffl ovei^ae, and upon which Pratt had

threatened to issne writs' agamstPalmei^s mother; omd Pafaner had gone almost down on

his knees to beg him no* to do sei; he said, *♦ For God's sake, dp not think of writs."

Xow, that 800(. being paid, Pratt said I shall only credit you for 66o^, I must take 200/,

for the interest. In his letter of the 19th of November be says, '*do fbr benh our sakes

try arrd make up the amount to a thousand " — ^that is^ make the 800/. up to a thousand

pottn<fe^«fbr without it I shall betmaWe torenew the" 1000ft** I must hare a larger

iiffitatmenty or else I canhot keep this bill afloat ^r you. Ho'Sadd* so, whether it was truo

or not does not matter in< this case, that was the^ represent&tionf which he made, and the

duress which he put on PsAmer ; and in truth it meant this, make it up to a thousand,

give me 200/. more, or the writ shall be sen^ on* your mother. He^does not say so, but

he sai^ something to ^e same efibot before, and it was a representatioH* tita« he oootd not

satisfy the people whom he said' he represented without that additional earn. Observe,

that letter is written on the 18th of November, and Palmer gets it ^at Rugeley when he*

anives on that evening from theraoe at which P<Aestat< w^en. Palmer, 'whor was at*

the racea the* fii«t day, went away in the evening, and went to Rogaley *, when* he gets

to^ogeley^ early in the morning of the 14th, tho next day probablyi, he Mts tins letter

of Pratt's pressing on him the necessity of paying a fiarther svon of 2(iOk • Whafdoea he

d^ ? 9ee if it is possible to doubt that at that time Cook's life was of the'utiwoBt wlue 'to

lum. He instantly returns to Shrewsbury, he eees Cook. They say he dosedihim. We

vill see how probable ^at is presently. He gets there on the Wednesday, he sees Oook:

Cook goes to bed in a state which I will not at present descnibe ; he gets' up much more*

sensible than he went to bed ; goes upon the race-course, ^and comes home with Palmer tO'

Rageleyon the next day, Thursday | he goes to bed when he gets to Rugeley; he-gets up

strH HI and uncomfortable, bat able to go out, and he dines with Palmer that day^ Friday.

I*tow I beg your attention to this letter. On that day, the 16th', Palmer writss thus to^

Piatt :-*i** I am obliged to come to Tattersall's on Monday to the settling, so* that T shall'

n*t ofl]fl and see you befift^ Monday, but a friend of mine will eall and leave you 200*.'

to*morR)w, and I will give you the remainder on Monday." That is written on the 16^,

the day they dine together at Palmer's house. Now, you recollect that the person who

ordinarily settled Cook's accounts in racinc transactions was a person of the name' of

I'isher, the wine^merchant, in Shoe Lanv. He was called as the first witness on this trial;

That very day Cook writes" to Fisheras follqws:*-" It is of very great importance* to both-

ftdmer and myself that a sum of OOC/. should be paid to a M*r. Pratt, of 5, Queen Street,'

May Fair, to-morrow without Ihil ; 300/. has been sent up to-night, and' if you wowld^)e'

kind enottgh- to pay the other 200?. te-morrow on the receipt of this, 3^u will greatly*

oblige me, and I will give it to you on Monday at Tattersall's." Then there is a post*-

^ipt which I AvJll tead, but make no comment upon it now: ** I am much better."" What

is the ftiir inference from those two letters ? I submit to you that the inflftrenceis that at

that date Cook was malting himself tery useful to PAlmer. Pratt u^as preesittg Mm

fwan additional sum of 3D0i;. when he had need of all his money, and Palmer having*

conmiunicated his diffictllty to MK Qo6k, Cook at once comfes forward and writes to hi!r'

agent to pay that 200/. Aud the letter shows more t you may have forgotten that lettfer, •

bort it was read in the first hour Aftei* the speech of my learned' friend the Attortotiyv

General ; you may have Iforgotten it, but I read it to you word for word,— the paseAge

" 300/. has been sent up to-night," shows that Cttok knew all' about it^ and prtibab#y ihsA

an interest in Palmer's transactions with Mr. P¥att; it was inserted merely for the* phi*-

pose of putting a good face upon it to- Mr. Pratt, as a man doe«r who, not hav*hg A ikrthlng

0^ the sum that he wants to pay, will ^Jtetendthathe has to pay mote, in order to iippre*-

seat that he has got a portion of what he 'Wants* to pay, and he says ;' "WMlyott lend me

a little more; I am not entirely dependent upon ^6i\ for the sum that I have to pay*" or

It means that on that day 500/., which had come to "Aeir hands in some way or o&ei-, was

by Cook made applicable to the convenience of Palmer, — onieof those things it means:

whichever way you take it, it iwoves to demonstration that Palmer 'And' Cobk were playing

^ each othet^s hands in respect of that heavy incumbrance upon Palmer; and that

fitter could rely upon Cook as a fest fH^^nd in any such little difficulty as that; and

though his difficulties sound large when' we talk of 11,500/., the difficulty of the day was

^^^^ ^>ke that, because in the spendthrift, reckless way in which they were Hving,

pattihg on bills from month to month, and- paying what sounds an enormous interest per

180 TRIAL OF WILLIAM FALMKK.

anuuiu, the actual outlay on the dajr vas not always so eonsideraftlei Istibffalt^-ycA'
that letter* shows that on the 16th of November when they say <he wae pou«ning CSbote,
Cook was behaTiDgto him in the nKtst friendly way, mis acqpiBintedwfth his circamtERideSy'
willing to assist in Hm relief of his embantisaments; andaotvally tO| dieretea portion of big'
earnings to the purposes of Palftner. It is |>erfeetiy {dais, but I will make it plainer if
yon will attend to me for a momeni ;loBger»i < Yon will Tettietaiber that part of the ^ase of
my friend is this: — he says thait he ijntended <t6 defiravd Cook ;itliai Palmer- having \^t
Cook ill in bed at Rngeley, ran np to lownDii the : Monda^r, intending toid^spatofa' him
on the Monday night or the Tnesday ) that he i)an np'toi towMy went, not to^ Fisher, who
was the agent of Cook, bnt to Hervingv who was his own agent,, and told Hendag that
he was anthcniaed by Cook to settle his Shrewsbury transactloni at TattersaH's^ thereby
getting command orer Cook's winnings^ that he aptpliedthemlo his oirai' j)urpo8es;'0Dd,
haying done so, determined to put Oeok out of the woy,-^that is their case* ' We had
the evidence of Fisher on the 4rt^ clay,^-*'Fisher is evidently a shrewd' intelligent mtn,
no friend of Palmer'SyThe garee, I do not mean to. say improperly, I do not - wish t»
throw imputations, bat he gave a • twist to the dosing at Slirewsbnry against Pahnear.
On the Monday, as on the Tuesday, Cook, though generally indisposed, wijis during giwt
part of tbe day <piite well* according to the evidence; on the Monday he saw his trainer
Saunders, be saw his two jockeys ; he gtit up and waa shaved ; he was comfortable the
whole day, and th^ theory is that. hie was comfortable Ix^cause Palmer was not there to
dose him, — ^you will see how grossly absurd it is presently. He was well on the Moaday,
quite well on the 'Tuesday ;> now^ if Palmer bad gone' up to London, representii^ that be
would do Coolt^s basinesS' for' him through Cook's own agent, Fisher, Palmer might
be perfectly certaiK if that .was done on- the Monday, Fisher would write to Cook on
that night 'to-' say that the thong Was done and made straight: Herring you se§ doe0
do- it the mootsentt the* thing is settled between Palmer and Herring ; Herring represents
Palmer as saying, ^^ You mnst write me word about some part of the transactions;" be
says, ''No, I shall write Mr. Cook word at Rugeley." Do not yon think Fisher
would have done the same ? and if Cook had not known that Palmer intended not to go
to Fisher but to Herring, do yon not think Cook would have been surprised on'
the Tuesday momiog at not hearing that he had seen Palmer, and that the transactions
were settled ?-coold Palmer, as a man of business, have relied upon Cook's not being
alarmed at Fisher's not doing it ? We had the evidence of Fisher,- who says, ^ On
the 17th of November, at Cook's request, I paid 200/. to Mr. ^ratt; his account in the
ordinary counae wosid have been settled at Tattersail's on Monday the 19th. I advanced
l^e 2001 to j>ay Pratt ; I knew that Cook had won at Shrewsbury, and I shoidd have
been ^ntitkd to haive deducted that 200/. from his winnings if I had settled his account ftt
TattersalFs ; il did nob settle the account." That explains the whole transaction; Cook
and Palmer undersloo^ each other perfectly wril ; it was 1^ ukterest of both of theni that
Pahner should he relieved from the difficulty of the pressure of 'Pratt, and accordingly
Cookt8aid,-^.As'.to the settlement, it shall not go through Fisher $> we twill have' tbe 200/.
from Fisher;- itshaM not be paid to him on Monday; Iwill letPaHmer.^oup and settle
the (whole thing through Herring.'^ And that is "what w&s done ;> ■' and.aooordiugly Fisher
haaneverbeen^paid since; . < . . > ■

'1 'Now there 'isi a letter to which IwHl call' yonnt attention^' of the 19th November,
IdSA, fnm Palmer to Pratt*—*' De&r. Sir,-^Ydn will • place the ao/Li 1 have just paid you,
and' the 490/.' yoawill receive from Mr< Hcnrring, together SOO/.,<.flnd the 200/. yon
reeeived CO Sajtiffday/^ that is the 200/* tiiat Fisher paid to Pratt > at the eki»«6S request
of!Cook^' f^ tor^rscrds payment t)f my nmflier^s <aeceptaiKe for 2000/., due 2.5th October,
mdkiug paid tbthis day the sum' of 1300/. Vi 'Cam )yoa dombtwh^n you take all that
togetI^r«^the dining^ together on the Frida^-(-<]oOk wrictiig ^that letter to Fisher, saying
it was of the' gr^ateM jin^poi^anee tO' him «S'. wi^lL as >to IBa£ner>that the 200/. should be
paid in ordler to pacify IPratib^ can lyoU doub(fe'thEat onithait> day Cook was a most convenient
Mend' to Pcilmer;! and tiiat he conUk mot > hyiposBibilit^ do iritheat him. But it does not
eod 'there;!' G6ok;<diedl dn tfae(jWednesdajf(anaBning)^aiiyv thedlst; if we want to koow
whlit effect 'that' dea'tb. had' On Salmer^iamiwhatidiilterebtihehSd in it, Palmer^s meoth
being sealed; we inasi'Tgetivt'frolnPnftti' 'Nf)body^«e;that we know knows anything
about it 7 Co6k ds i^ne^" ^On^ttte 22nd. November, the day tkfter the death,*^asd I am
sure you will mahe'sofaie tdlowadciei for' a^diiy' having* elapsed after the death of Cook
before he^rote^-^PaJaiifer wwtesitbus toiPr^ttfi-^A^* Ever since I saw you I have been
fully engaged wi^ Cook and not' able 'to leave > him.'' Now unless he murdered biin,
that is the truest sentence that e^vrwas >expre6^d. He watched the bed-side of his
friend; he was with hhn night and'ditf^; he attended him as a brother; he called his
friends around him ; he did sm. that ibhe moat afiPectinnate solicitude could do for a friend
^hat was ill, unless he was plotting his death — " And I am sorry to say after all he died

SEYENTH 0AT, MX^t iJl, 1858.^ 18!

t)u9 dgyvtMr'that yon liad better writs ta Saandert ; ba<i mind, I must hare Polestar if it
catai bd so BPnuDged ; ■ and should any* one call vapob. tou< to know what moneys Cook ever
had irom youy do* not answer tdw 4{ueslioD/' ' Theit: n& eay s, ** I sat np two fall nights witii
Cook^" That h«' eat vp the wh(de>of the- night may not be true, but that he was ready
to be CilUed if 'Gook should- be;Jl| ;/ land > fi^isab^th Mills say & after the first serious
parosy6mi"#heniS2^e weat>to iMdt^ she leftiPalmer sn:tke arra^^chair, sleeping, by the man
ifhom th^. say (he inteittdedi<tolQiairdct*^:> No -I •nnuMkcrers do not sleep by ih&r victims in
that wayi : What is>the answ^ ?i"lZ: redd it totyom 4n QDder that you- may see what min-
Cook's^- death 'brought '11700' jPalmer; •■ -The* answer of- Pratt is^-^-^nd you will see how
muohitinortas^d thedi^ciUties'of -Palmei^^^^ I have your note, and am ^eatly disap-
pointed at tie nflSr^iiececpt. iof< tiie mone}T-as pTtmnB^dyand at the vague assurance as to
any mmaey; { can' understand that.' your being detained' by the illness of your Mend
has bei^n the- cause )0f yomr not sending up the amountj" : -Attend to this paiAgraph : —
^'' Thetdeath of ^. Cook will now compel y6u to look aiboat as to the paym^rt of the
bill for- dQO/«, due the> 2n4' o£ December*) I have wtitten- Sannders, informing him of my
claimi and. nequesting to know byivitQCn what>claim he had fornkeep and training ; " so
ttiat the very first effect of Cook's death wHs, in Pratt's opinion, who knew all about
ityU) saddle Palmer alone With the snm of 500/j • He sayisf ^^Thei death of Cook will now.
compel, you .to lo<^ about as to the payment of the bill fopSOO^. on the<2nd ef December."
We will investigate the trmsaction out of which that ibill-arasev laud you will see; I
venUare>to say, that I can satisfy you -conolnsWely that the- trandaetioni ontiof which that
hill ajrose-was a transaction for Cook's aecomniGdatioiiPf -for which' < Palmer had lent
his name to accommodate Co<^y and for which' upon' Oookfa»dKsth^Flalmer became
porimarily and alone responsible. It will be for you- to judge^'if I pirore-that -to you,
whether it suited Palmer at that moment to stand before Hhe hoMerof that i500(. bUl*-^
soi^e client of Pnatt's — as the only man liable upon it,- and wheth^t theire wias the
same <d»nce, supposing it had been for his own accommodation, of putting it onv as they*
caU it^ after Cook's death, as there might have been before^ But le£ me be fu^ to the
prosecution, and state to you now the vieVr that ti^e Attomey-General takes of that^SOO/v
transaotic^ . As I told you, I mean to meet his case foot to foot, ■ and to dhow^ and I
hope to show him, that there is nothing in it ; that if he, as the.law^o(fiDerof the-OrOwn^*
had had 'the option of taking up this case or not, he would not hate takeiL-it up ; that<ther
Crown nev^r would have appeared upon it, but because the universal feeling of thfi*
eoanliy was such as to lender it impossible that the case should not be tried after liier
Terdict of wilftxl mutoder obtained on Dr. Taylor's evidence; and because the Crown»
haviog seen the absolute necessity oi its being tried, felt that it would :ab8Bdon the duty
of protecting every (me- of the Queen's subjects if it did not take care that a man with so^
mueh prejudice'' against himv'that man leading the life that 'Palnncr ted, andrdisgraned
by forgeiries tdia large amtouat, as it is said, and a gambler 'by proliiessionv- dMMildi no.
have a ^r tmal; Theire^ was ne other way of seomring a fair trial > for thismatr, asuthej
Attorney-General 'at' «nee I SBW^^here was no possibility of his being- fiaTed>;bu£.« by)
giringthe eooosel wdko^idiefended him all the inforanatioai that myhkand: had Mto8ei£t
We wUl'Seewhat.'hisnnewiis.' 'Myleamedfirie^ states it u^n.hts iiiatiudtiQn»iti/thi&
way: he is bound, as I told you in the beginning, in prosecuting > this* case to- prosecn)be(
it streouottsly ;• he k. bound to -put- the-fivcts togelther according to his' instsuetiedis ia> i^uch
a way that« ifthey wiillandiOughA toi^istablish gnilt, it i^ brought homejf ;Bro8eenth«ttS
most be condjdcted in that wajn, or the gnilt)^ woidd escape in nine cases out of tenj' * Ands
therefore nay friend, mpon-ithei-vdeiii; of thd ^ideno€>^a'Ooanparativel7 anperfieiEtlHonet-^
thinks that this i» the theory upomi^^hteh it 1 appears probable that PahBor> plott&d the)
death of Mr. Cooli;. I rwill read to yo«Lnf>om sDyi friend''S speaelH .with< refoiiene|e M 'thei
500^. biil-t^nsaotioni; 4nd>'as.IinaidepMand it,;it iid the rgreattetimifltake;*th&t waaie^ert
committed, and would > inot s(tia:t)d>fon.^ xBoasenifci but foarrthoipopidatiiprcjndiceiagaiBSti
Pahnen I think I can iajtl^y > you 1 <that < isi so t^^^ff Fvatt iBtili d^ining i ^ adivanoe Ithe.
money " ^ that is the 1 (KM^jl which Palhier- wfinted < him! (to adi^aDite-k^M .Prati ipfibposod anr
assignment by Cook of twa>mce4iorses|tons>fwUed'Pdlestlir)tivhich;wtonifthe) Shrewtfoiry
laces, and another called %f'iu8v ' ThatfjAssi^;iimiQDt''t^ iaftb£itatda:i]exieotited*l»y .Mp.
Cook in favour of Pratty aradiOo<^7«^asf eii titled] it<) iiwm»nB5Draafied,oi»/th«tl security,^
which realised 375/. in cash andi a wi«tei warWntt'L fChej* rtwisti'i* in this^ way, that
Palmer, having forged the^ en^xtfsesnentfof Cooki/^indjbeiBg. Iif raid )of detection, put Mr.
Co(^ out of the way. That is the view theythke a€ that easo^ :X thilik I can/ satisfy you
it is impossible that that can/ be the<correet vtew^it;<oailiKRt,.<by auy pofisibilitj, as it
seems to me-^it is for you to judge. , We ksoow exactly* whslt tookplaee ; wrhad it from
Pratt yesterday. What took plaee. was this r-^Palitaicr a|)pliiied>folr the loan of lOOO/.;*
Pratt said,.*'! can't let you have it.'' Palmer -«aid> *' Will you discount a ImU for

182 TRIAL OF WILLIAM PALMER.

500/.?" Pratt eaid, ♦* Not intliout sccuritf." Pftimer said, "What security ^ill
you take; it is for the aecottmodatioBiof Mr. Cook? I hftre nndertfiken to get the
enclosed bill cJasbed for Mr. Cook'; you had a aoo/. bill of fads/' He reminds liim
that he had been paid a 300/. bill, and' he saysi ''He is a very' good and ix^ponsible
man ; will you do it, and I will put my name to the bil)?" So ttuit'it-was represented
to Pratt as a transaction for the aceommodMion otf Co^k ; and Pratt^s answer is, '* If
Mr. Cook chooses to give me his seeurhy I- have' no objectioii, bat he nrast exeeute
a bill of sale of his two xace^hotwM P<4estar and Syidns, and he mtst eitecute a power
of attorney, and his signatitre to it tfOiM bei aiiesf^d' by some^ selieitorin the eonntrr, so
that I may be quite sure timt it is iwallya' valld'seonnty^; ^^ ^P^ those terms, if you
will get all that done, and Mr; -Cook will snbmil'to all that, Twill g^e hhil 375/. in
money, W^wine wanrant^^oharg^ng him* 101; iit^r expenses, and 50/. for diseoant,*' — ^making
nptthe sum o£ 500/.; that is what Pratt ift willlng^to do< There is- no doubt at all,
jaa. Imowy that Cook at;taoh)«A tibe highest vehie toPolestar*; he was not ^ng to
execute a bill of sale witht w power of attiM-ney to enable the moi*tgBgee or assignee to
eBforeeitatonce*; br was- not going to do that, and not goi lany money fbr dohig it;
he knew the value, of Polestav aadtSyriiii ; Poleetar was probably baeked f&t the engage-
ments on whidi he won the money at Shrewsbury. My fkiend says he never received
that 375/. ;. it is in the lasit degree improbable that he never received that money;
I put it to yeo as nsen of sense that he mast have received it ; do you think that he
remained after exeeuAing' the bMl-of sale on ^e 6th of September the whole time f^m
that day to his deadt without waiting to Pratt — '* Why, you have the bill of sale
of my two horses; anil I 'have not got any money upon them " ? Is'it credible, can you
believe Cook, who: was as much in- want of money as Palmer, do yon think he wMiM
throw arway his property ioEi that way, and let Pmtt obtain fhim bim a bill of sale
and gefc no money upon itP It ie incredible^ the only pretence for setting itu^is
this : it is a perfectly ^tal one that will not stand before sensible men for a minute^.-^
Along with the ch8q«e''fi)r-375/. he sent 315/. to Palmer jfor his own* purposes ; but
my ftriead says Palmer hanring got this dieque for 375/. payable to order, frandnlently
apinroprialed it to faimpelf ; forged the nante of Cook upon the i>ack of it, and kept
Cook, in ignoranee- of the transaction. Is that credible I tlkat during three whole
nxmdia Cook, who knew that he had executed a bill of sale cf his tw<o race^horses,
and I wilb show you^was in want of money, should have aU<)wed it to remain- so? Is it
nut mueh> more probable that die signature of Codt was p«f on tiiere with his* fidl
knerwledge? It is not suggested that there was any attempt at' imitating his hand-
wviting* Is it not more probable that Cook, who wanted ^the ready money, and who
iSDukl probably be pot to inconvenience if he did not* get the teftdy liioney, bttt only
th& 'means of getting it two days later^that Palmer should let him have Hie 815/. cash
-w4iich>wiMiseBt.np, and Palmer 'take tlie cheque? I will show you' -diere'is reason for
belMving that to be: the cose ; I will pat it to you in the flrstpla^e whether it is probable
he> wanldibes&leiit for litree mbnths? Palmer wriftesj "I %ill tbttkk yoii'to let me have
t]tft(ftl5/. by reftiirn of post impossible ;- if not, send it to me by Mondkynig^spost to the
poB^offiee^ Bomwstev. I- now return you Mr. Cook's psiper, atfd ' hie' wants -^e money on
Stendey if he ean have it ; I have not promised it for Satttrday^ so plelise 'to enclose it
wkfa mine iff cash in; a, registered letter, and he most pay for'iw being registereiiii*' So
that I yon rse^ Palmer wanted- it to be sent like Ms'own, and Cook wanted it to be
sentt'in'casfa.' ''Do not let it be* iMer than* Mondny 'nights ' post.*' Prartt writes
aekfetoFwledgin^i; the reoeipt of > die-do«ttment^ saying Iw *wiU'send'him his money to Don-
castisF^' and? endeavour to let Cook have hib money 'ftt thf^* saMe time. On ^e 10th
ofiSeftember'PalnlepwidtestD Pratt that heininstseiid'hlm'for Mr. Cook 385/. instead of
3t)Sl. and' tiie wine warrant; so that be can hand it to him with the 885/. Accordingly
hesei ia an iatimatiott that Oobk^ who wanted the money on the very day, was ineon-
vteienoed by «nly getting a dheque on LoMioft 1r4rioh-he 06aM not immediately chang^)
and 'therefiore: (Palmer gave him- ihe money, and"took>the'che<{ue. It is remarkable,
wjkeniw^dook'Bt th^bitfikingaeeovBt'Of •PalDMr'ait'Rugele;^, the 375/. is paid in by some-
bltdy te Pnimei^iaetouht; b«t the 3<l6//is< not pf^A into* Palmer -s account at all ; tha.t is
theoniy snm pakitin/on thatdayy so 'that i fMit ittoyou upon these facts, Pratt sayiog
in-ft'letOer which 'accompanies the money^, ^ I nmf tObUged fo send a cheque fcr Mr. Oook,
&Mr I have not iraeeived'tiie<li]ioiwy/wliioh Ji shall* do noddnbt to-morrow ;^' so that not being
able to send cash to tke> fall -ametmt hO' is^'Obliged to do that which did not suit Cook ;
he sent him ftroheqiiie whit^.ho'ieouid' not cash <Mi the day he* got it ; he is obliged to send
it to London' uules0i<he><coald {find 'some IHeod^down there, and that delftys him for a
whole day. I suibmit to yott asthetra^ version of ^e traittaotion that the bi!l was
acoepted for Cook*e aeeommodation ", Cook gave ie a* seottrity for it the two hofses

SEVENTH DAT, May 21, 1656. l£d

P«l«6tar aad ^jniu; Cook never Mmpiiiiaed to PjcmU daring the rert of his life that
he had not received the money upon it. It apftears in the oorrospoodcaca that Cook
wanted the ready money, aud that he granted it on Saturday, aud it would be probably
iuconvenieut if he bad got it a^ bit later than Monday \ though Palmer would not
promise to get it sooner than Tuesday. What says Palmer in his letter, which is not
written for &q purpose of this case, but written at the date of this transaction ? that he.
Palmer, would let Cook have the cash that was sent, and he himself take the cheque
with Cook's authonty. and put Cook's naote- ,oa the back of it ; and how else can you
account £ar the ulenoe of Cook, for the fact that t^ 37^. is paid into the acooaat of
Pahner at Kogeley, and no^ trace <^ tb« other large som of 315/. ? That is weU worthy
Yoor consideratioai. You cannot acoowwt by any reaaoaable mode for the fact that the
security given for that 500/. was Cook's horsea, and Cook remaining quiet aboat it- for
three months after he had exee&ted a regular UU of sale, except the sappositioii that it
was for Cook's aeeommodatum, and Co& go4 th& best part of the money ; and if so.
Palmer's name being on the bUl, wbat ia the efifeet «fCook'4S. death? Gentiemen, what
Pratt, who knew all about it, saya is : ** the deatfa'Of Cook makes yov-liable fbr that sum
of 500/. doA on. the 2ad Deeember." I sabmit to you on the seookid ground of motiTe,
wiiich my Reamed friend suggested, the case has altogether- &iled, and that it is perlhctly
clear tbaJt at the date of Cook's death Pratt was of opinion 'ttaat the death of Co^ threw
a further liability on Palmer of 500/. ; he teUs him so' in that letter. How conld it be
his interest to kill him ? We already find the diffieoltiea ^hioh Cook'« death brings upon
Palmer ; the bill of 500/., the danger of the* loss of Polcstar which he wanted very much
to have, and which Pratt would of course, unless Palmer paid the 500/., send to the
hammer, and realise so shortly ; we find that inquiries were at once appvdiended on the
part of Cook's friends as to the money Pratt had paid to Palmer out of those two bill
transactions, and the value which Mr. Cook had received for any endonement whi^ he
had given.

Just see another transaction of that date ; it is not quite so clear, as it strikes me, but
yet it makes it to my mind exceedingly improbable that Palmer should have desired the*
death of Cook. Exceedingly improbable I Mr. Wetherby told ua to*day that thoagfa
frequently stakes wc»i at a race were seht up by the clerk of the course to the winner's
bankers within, a week, it was not always so, and it woald not be a -matter of oompiaiat
if it was not ■ On the 20th of November, the day before Cook dies, and on which he
was perftotly comfortable and happy, enjoying the society of his friend Mr. Jones, with
whom, he was on- terms of the greatest iofimacy, and to whom he ceuld confide any
trouble that he.had^and who appears to be 4i gentleman in every way respectable and
intelligent— on that day Cook was well, and Mr. Jones was with him, and there iS'
no doubt that on. that day>. according to the evidence of Mr. Wetherby, he did sign
and give this eheque for 356i/« If Palmer killed hfim that nig^t, and by any >efaaiice ths
350/. should not have been sent up by Mr.. Frail, so as to be there oil the next' morning,
he, Mr. Wetherby, w<nid> not pay that cheque, dnd would never pay it tfternotiiee^
Cook's death, though the niDney should come up : he never did pay it The' end of 'that
transaction was this, that .Mr. Frail did- not stnd- it up, but made a cWb» -upon Cede
in respect of it. Cook'^s exeeutors disputed that, and Cook's exeeutDn» finally reoovered-
the money, but. they did not send it i^» to Mr. Wetherby. 1 4o not pst it as stseoe as tfae^
other case, because Palmer might think that the money would be there'; but M'alao''
might thii^ Ihat it woukL notbe tberej It is not at tall likely thaty ha^ng got' the cfaeque*-^
of 350/. from Cook, he would run the risk of losing that money bydestropng him in<th)e
night. Cook's friends being- th^re^. and- sure to^inetitate an immediate inquiry into his-
amiirB. Is that probable?. I submit to-yoU' it ia not It Is not Ukely that 'Painter ooidd
h&ve got a cheque for 350/», or Cook should have given it to him^ which* sfacmld not b^*
payaUe until the naxt day,, when there^nadght be no funds to meet itfv aad with that
uncertainty is it likely that Palmer shosild destroiy Cook ? That thtiwforo is in .^e last
degree improbable. It does not end thei^et what they (have said on the other side^is, you
know, that he got this dbeqne fraudulsntl^^^-rohisgoit possession of thi»< money, and'thenv
lest Cook shodid. detect it, he destroyed' huni It is not si all probable* that th«f would-
answer his puipose. The moment the 'breath Iras outof Cook's body hiS' friends w<oiild
surround the corpse. He might be perfectly eertsia that Mr. Jones would go to Mr.
Stevens, that Stevens and Bradford, his broth«tvin*la!#, wieuild be dowv, and that a poslK>
mortem examination would take place, and instead of settling 1rlth> Pratt as to^ this 500f.
bill and the 3$^. cheque^ he would have to settle with hard men ef baslnees,- miSn who
cared nothing for him, looked upon himiafi a leg, and would case neither for hie fbelings,
his interest^ nor anything, but would'lethim'go toruin whioh way he liked, not stirring
a finger to save him. Do you think that was pnobohki? I submit to you not. It

t , ,, t f , • 'I

184 ' TBUJ, QF WII^LIAM PAUUER. . ,.. \

*

does not end there: we kno^ from Herring that at th9t ye]ry^.tim« H/iii]Fi^g> hei4-ope
bill for 500/. on which Cook's mime was. . , !

The Attorney 'General, — I do Hot think thet^ is any proof of that.

Mr. Seryeant Shee^^WheXher it be «d' or Hot as to th4 9dOL, he had three 290I. bifti;
one of which I think was drawn by Go<^ and ^aeceptidd hy Palmer, and th^ other t-wd
drawn by Palmer and accepted 1^ Cook, oT'the othttr*way. ' . » ' /

The Attomey^Gmeral-^Yoti ^re quite righ'^ as to the 506/.* ; ,; ', . .

Mr. Serjeant Shee. — ^And another bill of SOO/,, which my friend stated and gave proof
was not his mother's signature. So that ^ere was a biil. for .5UQ(. not m her hand-
writing to which Cook was a pwty» ^or all of whicii Cook. either in whole, or 49. part^
unless he inished upon his own ruin^ must providei: in respect 0i which, fyv the accom-
modation of Palmer or not. Palmer could go to Cook aijd say, '^Kow, Cook, i.t is true
enough all these 'bills are for my accommo&tion, but what is th^ use of your making a
fiiss about that ? if I eannot pay, yorx mu^, or ^our stud will be sold up ; had you iioi better
giye your name to some more bills and make it easy?" If he put Cook to death that wag
gone. Agais, inaddkion to ^the 6ao/.biU, fyt whilch the biU of s^e on Syrius and Pole^tar
was giTea, the bill for 600/; hdld by Heiting was a forgery, according to their case, which
there would be no excuse for not meeUng; a 500/. bill in the hands of a man who wants
the money is not vo easily put on \ that MO/, bill would very soon find its way to his mother.
It would not hav« ioited Palmer^dialt his mother should know — his mother was a woman
of large fortune^ a respootable person I am told— she disliked his gambling propensltKS
though she liked herson ; neither did the excellent and most honourable man his brother,
before me, who 'Stands by him now, but who was estranged from him simply because
h^ disapproved- «f hie gambling; nei&er would he have given to him any countenance.
If Palmer wae -pressed to pay that 500/. and Cook was dead, there was nothing to ssre
him from the exposare. Nothing I If you doubt what I say is the truth, look through
the whole of the case-^^find . me in any portion of this most voluminous evidence the
slightesit trace that there was a man in the world who would lend his name to Palmer
t^ enabk him to get money. Is not the fact that he forged, if he did forge, the name of
his mother,- conclusive that he had no other resource ? Is there the least trace of evi-
dence, that he had: any other resource than the goodnature, the easiness, perhaps the
folly oi Cook, who could have renewed these bills for him — ^the three 1.^00/. bills and the
SUQ/r^^-ftnd put thenai on as they say ? and was it not quite certain that if Cook, the acceptor
of UienL, dropped, the claim would come upon Cook's executors, and then the executors
would asoertun all about it and sell him up? When you oome to think of it, is it
credible that the man un^er these circumstances should desire to bring not merely the
creditors and exieentort of Cook — ^who might be supposed, though Mr. ^vens is not one
of that olasS) to have some pity for Cook's friend — ^but men of business, down upon
him, whO'have'-no right to have any pity? A man dies, his afihirs are put into the bauds
ofsolioitora; they -have a plltin duty to perform, they csinnot be compassionate, they must
bfjusi; they must see the rights of their clients the executors established in due course
of ijbaw» and . compromise and arrangemeilt with them is wholly out bf the question. Can
y^u fii|diin»aiyy part of this case a single living person who Was willing to have done for
I^Uiaer what Cook bad been doing for him for two or three years ? Does it appear that there
wasiOneY Does it appear that Cook was a close-fisted fellow, and did not care to do Palmer
aitum.? When Palnes needed the 200/., which the harpy wanted fh>m him, Cook at once
w9K>te and saidy h is a matter of great importance to him as well as Palmer that this 2001.
should be paid ; and he even risked the displeasure of Fisher in doing it. Then again Cook
w-as, in his senses perfectly on the Tuesday. He cannot have been very rich at that time.
He gave him the- cheque for 350/. ' How is it possible t<r conceit that tmder those cir-
ciunManoes Palmer should have! an interest in the death of Cpok? and yet what is the
theory of the Crown ? That Pahner was GOitvmced itmt he could settle his afiairs as to
Cook better with Mr. Stevens than he ecmld wrth Cock himself-— settle these word-of-
honour tmnsaetioBS^ these things^ hakf of whidh would not bear inquiry in any way
as reasonable hvsiness <traiisae|tious, with a fihrewd and probably a penurious man—de-
liberately thought" that. it- wotuld answer his |mrpose better to come in contact with his
executor, Mr. Stevens,: whom Mr« Jooes might rush up to town and bring down with
him. I submit .to you' with confidenee, though what I say may be inconsistent with the
views generally entertained by the pcd[>lic'<^the public, however, have never had an oppor-
tunity of looku^g at aU these iettevs-^but it seems to me as clear as* anything can be, that
it was the manifest interest- of Pah»er that Cook should live. But in addition to its
being his interest that he should live, was it safe for him that he should die?
Palmer was a man who, added to a shrewd knowledge of the world a knowledge of his

SEVENTH DAT, Mat 21, 1856. 185

profession, and aiDoog oUier tilings m knowledge of chemistry. My learned friaidshave
pat iQ a book, which was found not concealed in any way, hat whidi was ti^en hy the
sheriff's <^leer, which Is maniftstly upon the hce or it Palmet^s manual of study when
he was in Lcmdon prqiaiing himsdf for his profession. If you look at the book you wiU
see that there are notes upon it in aH 4iieelioiis ; and H is put in with a view of showing,
and tfaesefoie we nay suppose does riiow^ tiiat Palmer knew whait tiie elloet of strychnia
woaldbe. If it does to^ asiro shalipcescntly sea, what ntiaisiti was there for aiking tlmt
stupid fellow Newton, who was egainiaBd in-the latter part of the Inqoiiy ? Here it is>
with notes in a great many plaoes, being a Manual for StudenlB preparing foreTaminalion
at Apothecaries' Hall, or other medical exauunations, by John Steggall ; and I shall prove
to you that at that time Pkdmef was attending the lectures of Dr. Steggall ; and upon the
page to which anybody would look first, namely the titlejwge, we haye, " Strychnia kills
hf e&onng tetanic finng of the respiratory muscles." That is not the only note; ihere
are some more upon that page, and the next page is coyered with them ; it is eyidently
a book on whidi pencil-notes were made in the course of his studies.

Xx>rd Campbell. — The Attorney-General stated that he did not place any reliance
upon that.

Mr. Serjeant Shee» — ^Exactly, my Lord ; my learned friend stated distinctly that he
did not press that as one of the strong points of the case. If it had been a perBon who
had not studied medicine it would haye been another thing, but my learned friend did
not press it, though he said he thought it was eyidenoe fair to be sd^mitted to you, thai
in one of these pages there is in pencil a statement of the properties of strychnia. I use*
it for this purpose, namely, to satisfy you that Palmer knew perfectly weU, and he had
studied his profession sufficiently when he was a young man, to know perfectly well,
that, if strychnia was administered, it would in all probalulity throw the yictim into
horrible conyulsions in a yery short time, and in a way so striking as to be the talk of a
small neighbourhood like Rugeley for a month or two, which would be time enou^ to*
alarm eyerjbody, and to proyoke inquiries into the circumstances of the death, which
must certainly end, or in sdl probability end, if he was guilty, in his eonyiction. If that
'vas 80, was he so circumstanced at that time as to make it safe for him to run the risk
of such suspicions ? His brother Walter Palmer had died in the month of August, and
his only hope unless his mother forgaye him or recognised those acceptances, his only
hope of extrication from his difficulties was the getting the amount due by the Prince of
Wales Insurance Company, to him as the assignee of the policy on Waller Palmer'b lifo ;
that was bis only chance, he had a chance that way» and it is plain that it was so good a
cbaoce, as I will show you presently, that he refused an offer of return of preimum from
the Company ; it does not appear what the amount was, — and Pratt who was his attorney
belieyed the chance to be so good, that he had actually got the discounts of the.<$e lBrg<& ■
sums of money upon it, and had resoWed under the directions of Palmer to pot it in
Suit It was really the only unpledged property he had^ and how was* he situated re*
specting it ? It is plain from the letttfs which were put in yesteiday, and it is fttrther '
plain from a piece of eyidenoe to which you will, I am sure, find it worth your while to-
pay great attention. We had Mr* Deane called yesterday* who is the attorney to thr
Prince of Wales Insurance Office; and for some, time — thj^ugh it had ceased jastat^Uiat
time-^but for some time preyiously to this month of Noyember, the Jnaoranee Compiim^
^hich, I belieye, is not a^ yjery. old Insurance Company, were annoyed at being eaiwd '•
upon to pay so large a sum, and they determined to do ail they could to resist it. They
accordixigly sent down Inspector Field to StafiGord^ and his man Simpson to make inquiries
which he could not do without talking and insiauadng suq[»ioi€sis,' andnnsiag a cloud of -
doubt and conjecture about Palmer, and this hi^d been going on for some oonsiderabte
time. Now, observe the evidence of Define, And you will see if it) is not ^o. He-
says, " The name of va^. firm is Chubb, Deane » and Chubb. I had been to Rugetey •
some time preyiously to tiie inquest. I know. Field, the detectiiie offiMT; we • wens*
solicitors to the Prince of Wales ,lnaupance, Office, it was in our employment lehat Pheld
went to Itugeley*, he was.at ]Rugt)leY,<)^ly», part, of oile day; he iMsibt'/Stafffiord -for
three or four days altogethev ; ,he didnptisee the iprisov^erl^mei'l this>yiait had beenr
preceded by that of another officer. , naimed Simpson :.^iimpfiOB went from Stafford to
iiageley with myself and Field; he tol4tff^iM had .seen' Palmetf ; I think he went into
Stafibrdshire in the first week in October*" , Then «Ay learned friend askedihim what they
went down for ; he said that they went, down. to mak« inquiries as to the habits of life <»
Mr. Walter Palmer, of whose death the Piinoe o£ Wales Insurance Office^had shortly before
received notice ; so that you see just before the death of Cook Ptalmer knew himself to
be an object of suspicion, but he acted as ii bethought it was-the most unfounded and
unwarrantable suspicion, putting the policy .of insuran>ee<uDtto the hands of an attorney
to enforce payment of it^and the office meeting the elaim by insinuations and inquiries

186 TaUL OF WILUAIil PALMEH.

«
wliick were of a nature to dtttroy Mb ekmxAMof «ad*to'<iirinp tunmA hhhenA the eus-
piciem of ABoiher Buurderj-

Oentfemeo, thait that was so I will lAiow 'y^wi by Ibe letter^ ivi^hich Were |Mit in
ijiiaBtcflday. You see-that the pressure by >Pratt upisn 'Foimer. to - ineet the two lOOOf. bills
aeTer todk place until tfaeoflUse disputed tbe ^o^entof that policy. Ail went as
«BMotfa as possible so long as Pratt •held^wtiat he belie^«d to be a good secorxty, the
poHey opon Walter Paftmer^ 'liie, wito was dead; bat when th^ be^an tb dispute it,
then yea Will fnd that Floattwntos to Paliser, and tdls him* the fitontio^ txf tMngsis
qiihe changed ; he eoald iiisaage the fatils Vety •wdi w^iie'ihst policy '^^at uudispt^ ;
bat BOW it is.dispnted that qinta altets the estate of tlsags ; he says, as he h«d somewhat
anticipated, he ^d» they can do 'soihing tiil the 'S-ith/ thftt is ■nf^itig ttm^rds compelling
the oAoe to pay, beoause iasaiaooe offices ^enerallytske three i&oniiis to pay ; tiud tiiec,
'Stating aowe otiier csMamstantes, he«ayB, *' this yott will observe qnito alters thearrai)^-
BMsnt, aiad I thevtiate mast reqiiest yon to make prepairationff fbt meeting the two biHs
due at the end of this month;*' thBt"#as ^herethe d^ftonUy waS, l^at Was where the
.pinch was. Then, he says^ he Bhall not flag in his exertions, and'so on, and he refers to the
circumstances connected with the dispute ; Mr. Pratt says — ^you. Palmer, know whether
they have any gronnd to dispute that policy upon -your brother's life; you are enfoTcing
it, and if you kave no right to do it, it is at your peril; tiiat is what it means, and
then he goes on to say, we most try and make them pay : that was the position in which
Pratt, who was acting for him, stood as to this Prince of Wales Insurance Office. He says,
** In any erent bear m mind that you must be prepared to cover your mother's accept-
ances for the 4000/. due at the end of the month ;" there was the pinch, the ofl5ce "vould
not pay, the 4000/. was becoming due, the holder of the bills saw he was without security,
and if any thing occurred to increase the suspicions of the insurance office, which was very
reluctant to pay, the 13,000/. was lost for ever, lost beyond hope. Gentlemen, that 13,000/.
is sure to be paid unless that man is convicted of murder ; and that has a great deal to
^o with the clamour and alarm which have been excited ; so sure as that man is saved,
and saved, I believe, he will be, that 13,000/. is paid; there is no defence, no pretence for
a defence ; the letters of the office make that plain ; they took an enormous premium:
knowing that the man was only thirty, they took a pi>emium for a- man of fifty.

Mr. Attorney-General, — ^That is not in evidenee ; do you mean to prove that ?

Mr. Serjeant Shee. — I do not know whether I can show that to be the actual premiuoH
but the letters which were put in show that the premium was enormous ; and I say that
as sure as he is saved that 13,000/. is good for him, and wiUpay all his creditors.

Now observe the position in which he was at the moment: all the correspondeaee
turns upon that. My learned friend read' it yesterday in perfect fairness, and he must
have seen the effect of it, or he must have taken a view of it entirdy different from ^
one which I take ; but whichever view he took of it, I am sm*e he would put it in,
seeing the manner in which this case has been conducted, and the mani&t desire
of the Orown, represented by my learned friend the Attorney-General in this court,
that the trial shall be alone for the discovery of truth. .This coTrespondencc would
have been put in at any rate, whatever its effect, — and it saves, the prisoner, if there is
common sense in man.

Now observe, there is another letter fixwa Pratt containing tbis passage ; " I have
your note, acknowledging receipt by your mother of the 2000/.;. acceptance, due th«
2nd of October; why not let her acknowledge it herself ?• you .must iseally not fail to
fiome up at once, if it be for the purpose of arranging for the payment of the two bills
at the end of the month; remember I can make no terms for their renewal, and .they
mast be,]paid. ^ I will of course hold the {)olic^ for ^ much as it is wortb," and eo on.
At this tii^e Simpson and Pield were making inquiries hoRf a young- man of thirty had
died, who had had delirium tremens three times,, as their OMtn physician Dr. Hastings a»d
Mr. Wardell had informed them. Then in a postscript, he says, he " casts* no doubt upon
the capability of the company to {)ay, but that in the natiLre of things, with eo large an
amount in question, it is not surprising l^t if th^y think they have grouadsxfor resisting
they should temprise by delay ;** does not that show that at that ^te at least, the 6th
of October, suspicions were hanging ifx me^iaeing mete<»:s about Palmer's head, which
wodld come down with irresistible momentum and crash hinf v^iwa. fiuspicion of
a sudden death by piuxder. Do you beiieve.that a man who wrote wfaat the effeets
of strychnia were in his manual would risk such a scene as a death4)ed by strychnia,
in the presence of the dearest and best finend of Cook — a man whom he could not
influence, a medical man, who liked him and loved him well enough wh&a. he knew he
was ill to sleep with him in the same room that he might be i*eady to attend to him in
case he wanted assistance during the night ? Is that common sense ; are you going to
endorse .such a theory as that upon the suggestion of Dr. Alfi^d Tayli^: about the

SBVEMtH DAT, Mat 21, 1856. 187

«fieetSttbat 6trychiua'pi«diiced upon ]u»inF« «^bllB-? lu^Mssible, perfbetlj impossiMe !
as I submit to you. JEhit to proceed.: I win prove to yDu, most 'elearly, ibe X}«sition in
Yhi<Ui biQ .wa&< Qa tlie otlier aidd'Of the lettar of the lOtii of Ootobenr Mr. Pn^ writes,
**Copy of solicitors* reply;" that ifi, the soUoiton 4o tfaePiinee of Wales laBuranee
Office. He savB, " I sHiy add, that I hear the office have been making inqairies
ia ei^ery diiectioD." Tx> be. euie^ FieM ivas employed; he is not now in the police,
but he is employad as a deteoliife officer ; he nras at 'Stafibrd, and was at Rugeley,.
and was making inquiries install direotiona; inquiries oeuM be made at Stafford as
well as Bugelay,. and aU that had iaken jpte^De at ^Rngeley jnst as easily ascertained
there as at Hugelej itself ; . whatever had > taken plaee there wtmld be known.
He says they .have . been, miiki'^g uiquiriics inr all ddrections. It is plain then that he
knew .that aospipona were then rife, or that thi^ were^ <eadeaTotiring to create suspi-
cionsy against. him,, about the petioyon the life of Walter PiUaaer. Here is tbe very
letter which the company wrote in answer to the eUimy dated 8tfa of October, 1855 ;
it is. f ram Messrs.. Chubby Deane, and Ghubfo, the selicttors to the office, addressed to
Thomas Pratt, Esq., acknowled^fni^ ti>e application ; and shortly - afterwards Messrs.
Chnbh.send a reply to the apphealaoii : ^there is no date to it, but it is enckned in a.
letter of the 18th of October from .Pratt to Pahnor, After ap(^ogi9ing for not answering
the letter of the 16th instant, owing to the absence of Mr. Deaiae, tfaey refer to the
'* local investigation having been nuyde,'and deeysae to pay the ckdm upon the ground
that tine facts, disclosed in the coarse <yf the inquiry are such as fully to warrant them
in doing so." These are letters which my learned &iend thought it right to put in
yesterday; they are evidence for the Crown, and what is the inferanee from them?
Judge if >you please firom some of the letters to Pratt, and the one which I read first
from Pratt to Pahner. Palmer determined that the polSsy should be paid ; he took the
advice of Sir, Fitzroy Kelly. I see here it is said, ** The case will be laid before Kelly
to-morrow." This letter came just before the end of the long vacation-; the time to
take proceedings had only just commenced in any errent, because the three months had
only just expired. -But so sure as anything happened by foul play to* Cook, he had no
more chance of getting the 13,000/. than 130,000/. from the Pnnce of Wales Insurance
Office, — ^none wlmtever. That was the only means he had at that time of extricating
himself from those incumbrances.

Grentlemen, I have detained you a long time upon this, but not I trust too long, if
the view I have submitted be one worthy of your consideration. 1 infer from all this
that ^Imer had no interest whatever to put Cook to death ; that it was contrary to
his interest in a pecuniary point of view, and brought claims upon him, some of
them small, others of a larger amount, of which he might have shared the -liability
yntii Cook, if not have thrown it entirely upon Cook; that it forced an immediate
settlement of the affiiirs of Cook, not with Cook himself, who was an easy man pro-
bably — ^it is, pisdn he was from these documents — but with hard and exacting executors
and 'their solicitors, and that therefore in a pecuniary sense he had every motive of
interest to desire that Cook should live; and further he had no chance of gettmg a
roady payment of the 13,000/., no chance of the sudden death of Cook passing without
suspicion and inquiry, add therefore he could not think it safe for him that he Should die.
I cannot, I think, be so mu(^ mistaken as that a considerable portion of these obser-
vaticfns is not well worthy your attention. I humbly contend that the suggested
motive altegctber Mis ; and I conclude that head of the observations which I have
to address to yon, by saying that I submit respectftilly to you, to the Court, and to my
learned* Mends, that that pottion of this case has failed. It could not be the interest of
Palsoer that Cook sfaodld die.

I now pcoceed'to the next head ; and it is impossible in dealing with this evidence, to
observe altogether* the order of date ; I must group the facts iis well as I can, in order to
deal with the whole of the evidenbe. The question is whether the symptoms of Cook
belbt« his death, and the appearances presented by his body after death, were consistent
-with the theory of his having died by strychnia poison, and inconsistent with the theory
cf his having m^edf^m other and natural causes. It is under this head, gentlemen^ that
I siiall discuss, I hope not at undue length, the medical evidence in this cause, and present
t» yoiu such observations as occur to -me upon the -witnesses who have been called to
anpport the view which the Crown takes of the -effect of that medical evidence.

For this pufpose, ^tet ns bricfiy, in a sentence or ttro, run over the facts : Cook died
on Wednesday morning, the 21st of November, at one o'clock, in violent convulsions ;
he died in the presenee of Mr. Jones. It was no sooner light than Jones posted
up to town to see' Cook's stepfather and executor,' Mr. Stevens, who came down and was
intneduoed to Palmer. Palmer took him up to the corpse and uncovered the corpse to the
thighs — brarve man He must have been if he was a murderer, to do that — ^uncovered the

188 TRIAL OP WILLIAM PALMER.

corpse to the thighs before him. Sterens obsenred the body, and wondered he ooiild have
died, he looked so oalin* so oottpeeedy so irdl^so Httle lenaciatBdf lie obseBrveA^ iadeeB
some slight rigidity aboat the moscles. I refer to his deposition. I am not sttc^hethcr
Stevens^ depontioiet. WM read->-4»at it la efKLenoesu^dd torasj lie tDOk-his hand and
w<mdered that he should ham died $ his svsimioiis .?mere^ifl(qnadiatel|^iiavo«edb Me
dined that df^ at B«geleg^ aod i^ed Falmer toi dimierilvithihnn^ and ^Bestiontdlhitt
aboat the bettiog^book ; got •ai^ry ihaAit was not ipaodnaid, diBsemUcd ^tbPaliMf,
cross-eiuiininied him, we»t op to iIoiipsb, aneti himi aftenranda lafa. thei 8|atuw atf^Eostcn
Sqoare, afterwards at Ra^y } allerwatda atWobrartoa^ aoaips ati 'Ragelegr^ and^fttHast
threw off the mask,. and, nadnsssiaghim.iaalonai'to. whilihfl sli^ caU year latteatioi
presently, gave Palmer eJeacly .to ndeoitand tbaA heait8paetodihim»>a]id;iiltend)ed <«pK)le
the whole matter ta ihe v&ry.&im,' Ha neaahvcd UptoaF/postoileatemfcsBainatiaik^iaYidiL
post-mortem examiaaftian ta«ft:/|»lBoa.: .The app<Muraikoefit.iriurii'*'wBre^!fr9aenlad''at'|llft
death of Cook weva aach:a^>fii|ghtAhave^btfin^expetedTbj^' those) nvihoihad'fteen^iai^
quainted with hia course «f li& and • hia gaaeral hddth^. hasf patsfeHts^-itiis^ pctytor'fisif
anything hacd <^ fam-^his yioo^-r-VyiiM^nQi »j moire itiiaB.:tiia<h<^4is rioea, . and ^tiib
company^ the drinkii^, idb^ taoing icompawf, which'bekcpt./ His fiither had; dial
at the ag^ of thirty, hiamothiet^ ftbaut the aaarle age, a year hoc tworaftcr ihe had maffifid
Mr. Stevens; hiys liothc^r waadeUeate^i:his aister' was delieale; he wasibeUetvedby ini
physicians to have.someithirtf-of a pnkaonary complaittt^ and, whea. fats body wasof^epeft,
his lungs weve foond to.ibietaphyiMDatous, that is, thsir auvvesBeis wew distended
with air. On ^irther inquiry,! &r.I take both the examinations togeiiier, it iras
found that for .w length of tisoeha had been troubled with a very ugiy^sore: thtoafr^
a sore throat bed Cfnongh to reetder itneoessary that it should be constant^ Jtouchedwith
caustic as well as-his tongue ; he vould not have been able to swallow without il 1%^
tonsils of his throat were at the very Ume he 1^ for the Shrewsbury races, tibough mack
better thaat^yhadbeeuvSaraaiid inflamed — one of them was very nearly gene, th^
other was^vevy' much reduced in mxe ; and he knew so much better about hamscif and
the cause of itaU probahlv than hb medical adviser, that he very nmoh preferred mereoTf
to any other ^jBoil^ lor. his oemfdaiBt He had, besides that, ttacea ahout his pereoi
which have been so often referred to, the result of disease, that they need not be more
particularly mentioned than they have been already, as to the extent of whsch and the
jcharacter of which some little doubt exists ; but they did not oome by aji Drdinarf and
chaste v^ode of \i£e, you may depend upon it ; and, altogether, as fiur as it went, heseem^to
have b^n about as loose a young man as one is in 3ie hal»t of meeting, without besflg
utterly lost to all sense of honour and propriety, which I do not meam to suggest that
he was. , '

His body was opened ; the soreness of his tongue was manifest ; I rather collect tiist
it was not actually sore at the time of his dea£-^yet that there were what'lhey«all
follicles, and symptoms, if not recent at least not very ancient,' of actnal ^ ulcers^ th«
inside of his mouth, too, had been uloerated, or the skin taJoen off by aome' sort Cff
Soren,ess attributed to decayed teeth. We all of us« profaehly; have decayed tertb^
but that dees not happen to us which happened "to him: «t was. sote *ob both side?.
The sores about his month he thought himself were, syphilitic,, and covtld not be pear*
suaded by the v^ry respectable gentleoiao, Dr.> Savage; to rattend readidy <to his advice.
^e thought be was not -weak enough, L think he said' §oqV enotigh, to take quaek
medicines ; hat weak eaough to take the advice of any medical quads who had
assurajoce enough to give advice to him, bdi^ving.that the i best tiling for his ccinpiiaint
was mercupry; and hewas apprehensftYe^.I'beUeve4 that wbaf aiie the worst symptoms of
that disease for which mercury is. giveuysaaielyj spots upon 'the 'body, wDUld make ^i^
appearance^, and that poasiUy (I beU^a -sudi : things ido' happen) some dayiior 'other he
would find on, th# morning, of a race -his /ftBe> coirered/' wttk lai^ icoppca^coloared
blotches,.wbic^<^ould,plainly!shoiw whafi'tife.hft'had been kading. • lliat waa Ihe soit
of man he -was. . dl^ny ^ach a.nian .has>ire£otiiiedi andbepome a good 'and * respectable
mepaher of ;SPC»ei;y,M Iishoaldi be jSODsy ioutaj anything. undtdy harsh iipoiB a man whs
is gone.; • biij: th0,sfate (^ hisfh^alith if^aiiiailapai^ffaho^t for oar inquiirv herei It is plsia
that h^ had in>hisAwni(Opii)ionL^eik>a0«JBtedrby-viirufe]it8^ and that that had not

corrected his,ha|}its, fbr,Jheihadbec<Mtte(Tafeai|lyid^eBSed^* 'The medical mea whoi attended
him before conciiUTed inth^/dpinumi; ^ndi'Jirpea 'his body .was opened, in addition to all
those plainer symptoms of ill^eM <^}tbe e|fn»tiDn the Secondr post-mortem exaoiiBation, there
was between the QeliGatem«mlipaAe,wJUchfCi(i1iiem.«fhe.spiimI marrow, and whieh is called
the arachnoid, I believe — I. thmk. I ami:i^fartr^Htheire was pressing uipoii the arachnoid
and embedded to some extent in the^ next ea^eri^g^ laot so delicate^ tbough still delicate,
called the dura mater, granules, as given in enidtece^- of such an extent as I will satisfr
you by men competent to inform you would, if his body had been opened in the dead-

.1/

SEVENTH DAY, May 21, 1856. 189

"i >•

Arnica o^>«a3P.<]iD8p&tftl in^ tfaisi m9tnspota,^hav0 b^en siiMlvaiid deteimined to be the catise

i-.«uSiidbi«a6'<ftk0 o<k]iditMii«f Co^'oslf jiartially discoreped on the post-mortem ex-
jt Hi in atUai- «faigh/]to6k..piice -at the desire "ol (he executor, Mr. Stevens. That exami-
iittjticmiirastaqfc iMBdixiited. with i that, e&tirvty; ^o to -«pealc— with that thorough determi-
j»«kioitlto< iB^dstigatter^iie .wholes izifittei^--4!lttt'aJI^^ 'was thotsght to be necessary.
SQ«.hk«iB wasjopenBib and vw. cMcM la order to seetf there was any disease there ; bat,
Atljimdfirs^a|ii>4tv'iitha awa^ wat'^ not eibai&ined mtioK' below the junction between the
Afiek^jSttl the bfldky ((boiit naif iia iach4>i/Theidiseal5e,>«u«ih4is it was, was not ascertained,
JI(9nfpactodUiJiI!lheiStQmaikh>«ae4ak«n'b4t^a]fdiyt»i ^avre ha4 a'fiioryabout Palmer shoying
jPiriipu$duiigua9BnitcoOMbody^>{whick{I thuik b ak£leii«tood<was in the opinion of those
f|{ho4G;W]Bfaiee^a^letttf/foilaak«fr'Jodgimi^^h»^Iw whose dut^

iit<isijiko»46tmitit«t*(bat fsdll t]|« itJwa$4i snggistionwhiobi really oame to nothing, which, if
iiw<«refr]iqcas8aii7,- LbclieFq I should :be- in-a'ConditSoii to disprovej-^it was suggested that
BftloMK poshed tbA epemtor; Jir./D6T0iiahire> so thai a part of the contents of the stomach
iWfftp^4 hoUtMr^-iileToiifl^esaid that ao pftfft of 4t:did esoipe, iind that it was sent in
^jar^:ifiiB&rto.Mr.<£ter6,' a nespeotaUe solicitor a<l Shi^sbury^ and then pn to London
iwd jstibmitted' for exaihijurtioii to Dr. Taylor ; that Dr^ Taylor snd Dr. Rees examined it ;
lhfijr> fOLamined it -with- the .knowledge ihat there -was ft suspicion somewhere, arising, no
dctabti4h>Hi: the Ihot that Eobetfts, one of the witness^ who has been called^ had told, and
likely ienoMgb iie dionld tell* in a little place like-Itu^leyv< ttutt Palmer' hftd bought some
stiiyoktfia .in-his shop on the Tuesday. There was a letter sent up to Mr. Stevens, and I
dft noi find fimLt atcul with Mr. Stevens for ccMnmiinicatiBg it to Dr. Taylor, it was quite
fight tkfit.he<i^oald do so: with that knowledge Dr. Taylor wrote a letter, which I think
I hejrQjakeadyin the oonrse of my address tONday i*ead to yoil, in whibh he attributed the
4tathito jmlimony. He eaid it mat/ lucre been caused, possibly, by antimoh)^. I put ah
ftmptaaeia upon the word " may," because Dr. Taylor himself desires emphasis to be put
«pen> 4he ward "* may." He says I did not mean to say thai it wa^ caused by antimony,
ioi it[ is poesible it was caused by antimony. Now tha;t is the way in which Dr. Taylor
deairee thali letter to be taken. You will judge of it.

Dr.^TftylDr attends the coroner's inquest, which is held iii conseqttetioe, I presume, of
his letter. I do not know whether that is so oi: not, but in consequence of suspicions
entertained, and probably in consequence of the letter which he sent in answer to Mr.
Stevens's iiiiqiiizies; amd he hears the evidence of Jones, and of Mills, and of Roberts, and of
othera; hut I call your attention to ^e evidence of those three witnesses, because I think,
in &imess to Dr. Taylor, it must be presumed that they principally influenced his opinion.
^0w, then, I say that upon- the loose evidence of chambermaids, and waitresses, and
hous^eepeniy- against the opinion of the medical man who attended Cook in his last
illness,! ox* at any 'rate with no encouragement, as I will satisfy you presently (for there is
an oheervaition to he made upon that)— ^with no encouragement from the meai|(»l man, Mr.
•Jones, the snrgeoo at Lutterworth, who was of an age and character, having seen the
whole illness^ to>form an opinion upon the-matter^Dr. Taylor, having heard the evidence
of BUxabeth Mills^ and the evidence of Mr. Jones, and of Koberts, came at Once boldly to
the conclusion that his notion Chat antimony was the cause of death was a mistake ; and
he had the incredible impradeiiee-^n . imprudence which has led to all this dreadful
«jueitemen1r-Hm imprudence which has rendered it necessary that this inquiry should take
place in thia form and in this: place, if atall—*to state upon hi& oath befbre that jury
that be believed that the^ pills' which were administered to Cook on the Monday and
Tuesday night contained s:(bryohqiaf an^ that Cook was poisoned by it.

Allow me for a moment to ask your < attention to whet the real chameter of thfilt
•opinion was^ That opindoa way delivered, wds irrevocable. By it Taylor's reputation
was staked against Palmer's life. Instantly .fbllowed by the verdict of wilfUl mnrder, it
flew upon the wings of the press aintoevieity ho«ise <m the United ilfngdt>itf. It becanlie
iciM>wnthat,<aeoording*totlieopiniohi of a man w^ose whole life had been VteVofed to
Mence, a; gentlema,n of penonal dttqraetor peifiictly uni^peacfaed, a than ■who istood well
with his mends in the medical- profes8io]>>««^thiit>- on his opinion, not bobjecturaf, taol
d«Uveced, ae an opinionyof the kindmaghttpr^erly'be delivered, ih sL ^rifvate room, to
parsons on whose disonetion reliancai was placed; Imt delivered ispbn oath in a public
i^occn, in the puhlio inn* of a little village wher^ everything that todk l^ate' wais known
''-Hmd he must have known^ I cannot but think, that «tte^l«ioiifi had been, ad I say, and
aa I think yon wiU.be.satisfied« undniy.exditedabout^ the deaih of Walter Palmer— that,
according to bis opinion^ Cook's death, had been icansed* by strychnia. In facit said Dr.
Taylor, though I find no trace of strychnia^ and tiiough there is nothing to induce me to
l>eu«vethat there is stryohnia in the body^^exeept the stiggestion that on the Tuesday
Palmer bought it of Roberts (which would not account in any way, supposing the mere

1^0 TfSAL OF WILLIAM PALMER.

purcliase 6f strychnia could nccotmt'for anything, for the papox^on or Mdnday ulgl*),
yet, having heard that eyidence, knowing that I have &iled to disoor^r the^ preaenes of
strychnia, I will nndertake upon my oa^ to say, and on my evedit-iniblish i»*ih6 whole
world, that the pills wiiich were given to him on MoBoay and- ■ THwsday- nigkt «<»•
tained strychnia, and thftt he died fi«m that poison. Obserrv what ft- asBNtlkts to. It
ascertains, not npon scientific, orweH-in^Qsqiiied, or cottsistent testineny, hot nponlevti-
mony ill-informed, of the tmmblest class, the least fittedtO' detail ^aoonratofy tbe fiyiBpt<«i$
of snch a disease as it is imputed to be, on e^idenee'iMA ootislsteBt'with its^, as respects
the evidence of Elizabeth MiBs in all particalaT«) or-witktbe eTidenoe of a janchtwtter
informed person, Mr. Jones, or 'with the opinion* of -Mr. Joneffr^'i'seeirtaiiis, andprfr*
nounces positively, ^at the disease of which Co(^ dini wa^ bot snapiyeaBTakioBS of a
tetanic form, however violent — ^not convoisioiis wil3i«myfeBtUJ#e8 oi^tertaDUS/ h«A tint it
was actutd tetanus, and that description of Ik wtikii could fl^y b6 eaused by one pmsoB,
and that poison strychnia. That is -the eridenoe: he lBiy» lihat down aaaproposilaeBOB
which he is perfectly Satisfied to re^t, and on that &e verdict goes.

Gentlemen, let me ask you in what position we are placed for the -saffety of ow liT«
and ^imilies if, npon sudi- evidence as this, upon suspicions- so eoccited and so sailctioBed
by hsusty opinions of medical men, we are liable ffvery time a sudd^ death takes placed
a funily to be put upon our triali; on suspicion of fo«d plar to those with whom ws live?
In the cases which are usually discussed in this Com-t, witnesses are called to giireTeTi-
dence respectilig processes and'means of arriving at truth with a knowledge of the &6(s in
question, with the operation of which processes the prosecuting CotHisel, the Jttdge^ and
the Jurors are as well acquainted as- the witnesses themselves. The witnesses come to speak
to &ets. a gnat pcfftion of which are irithin the orcUnary knowiedge and apptMiatkixlf
mankind J but if science is admitted to dogmatise in our courts — science not exact* ift its
nature — science not snceessful, bat baffled even by its own tests — science bearing upon
its forehead the motto that "a little learning is a dasgerom thing" — if that is to be iu-
troduoed to state processes of arriving at truth, conclusive to its satisfactioB, b«t 'v^hidi
we cannot fdllow, and opinions respecting the caose of death whi^ those processes have
not discovered, judges and jurors will have an amount of responsibility thrown upen
them too great for human nature to bear. This gentleman, Dr. Taylor, if he hadfoafl^
the poison by his own tests, after long experience of their effioacy, would have becnav«ry
good witness to have proved unquestionably that strychnia was there; but not haTing
Kmnd it, not having seen the patient, and lotowing nothing about him bat whsfl I3izabe&
Mills told him, and what he heard from Mr. Jones, who md not-agree with ham, oe who
•gave no evidence agreeing with him-^with no better means of m^Drmation than tiAt,
he thinks himself justified, upon his oath in a public court, to say that; tbe pUls admi-
nistered by the medical man (of course he did not mean toiBpnteany ntsconduot to Mr.
Bamford) contained stryohBia, that murder was t^omraitted, and: Cook poisfmed^by it, ^
he is allowed to say that, what fixmily and what medical praetit&(>neF ia- safe ? GentiemcBf
I beg to ask yon on what ground does he say that ? Not on anypeettllar knoif^kdge, for
he hsL^ not any knowledge as to the efiFects of strychttna- moat thaa aoy of us — ^myseUi
if yon pl^se ; for when we come thcnroi^hly to look into it^- he. does- not appear, of ^
^ewn knowled^ to have seen a single case of strydmia in thje* hvqpaa^ subject ; and yet he
has be^n darmg enough, knowing that the consequences- would bo diastrous to this man
— knowing perfectly well that all'the- world, otj at aU e^ents^ thegreat majority of the
world, WQru]4 take for granted that a medical man in hn> position w<mldf - not give,a hostf
opinion — ^he has ^e incredible courage to dedares on his oath,' that the pills that wei«
given, as far as he knew, by Dr. Bamford, contained stryehnsa, and that Cook was
^tolsoned by Uiem I

I hsre said **"& tittle kaming is a daageroos' thing; " and it appears to me that there
Aever wab a case in which the adage was so applicable as it is- in t&k. Of all the works
6f Grod, the one best cakaxlated to fill us with; wonder' and admiratidb, and oonvinoe us cf
our dependence on oar Maker, and the utter iKxthiDgoflsS of ourselves, is the mortal
coil i& which we live, and breathe,' and tfainlL^ andf hare ofur being.' Every miaute of ovr
lives functions are perfbrmed at onrw^Vthe'imerring' anesracy of which no^og hat
Omniscience and Omnipotence cenld haeve tecuved. W<e tfeeir and see ^uctly what takes
place) and ydt the mbmeott we afttempt to explain what takes plaee» the instant weendeft-
vour to gi^e a reason fbrwhipt'we'know,>amdfSe^ aild dov the mystery of cre»tio»^'^0«^
created man to fais own ims^^ to* the image of €k)d' created- He 'hisa ''-^-ftrrests- siii'
«ottrse, and we are flung back upon conjecttnre'tod doabt. We-kntfw in a sense— ^«
'snppoee — ^that the soft medidlary hnbstance whi^^ is withiiir-^« oovfty of the head is the
seat oS thought, of sensation, and of wfU; We know that thait soft medulteiy snbstasee
is continued down the middle ^ the back, protected by a bony du«t or canid, within wteiek
bony duct or canal it lies embedded ; and we know that fhmt the-' sides of this bony duet,

SEVENTH CiA'Y, Mat 31,. 1859. 191

amid Ibem <M9 ueduttuy^aiibotanoe,! proceed mk infinite vantty of nerves, the conduits of
sensaiton- ftova: all parts of the bodjr to the 'Sonl, aad of onasolee ooimeoted and dependent
cm tfaem^ the instromente of Tolniitargr- motion^. This w^hnov ; and we know that by that
ptmeM iii ^e' ordinary actions* of our litres, at our own will, are- effected with the most
wonderfhl preoinom Sometimies, howewer^ these nerves and musctes depart froin their
nonlkal ^hforacter^iaad^ iastoad of )beiiig.theinsre!insti!iiments.of tiie will of the soul,
beodxne inregul^ ccsnnrisiTe^ .tinnnl<taiiry» . viwdMiating^ t».theinselvee a. sort of 'independent
vitality, totiUly regardlcesnf^he avfchorxty to wihioh they .are ordinarily sutgect When
tht>own) into this state o£ ioitatioii.and: exotteneht, their effects are known by the
geeeralname of eoDTttkieiia; . lt\6s (remarkahlct nnliko. most other ftae names, they are
fiota-moderaadapftaliBe.- Thcaaeient&rhad thekn to express the very same Uiing; the
6|)afii»odic aaditeftiBaiic i^fieotkais >wefe koewB.then, andtaa much about them hiinch:eds and
thottsands'of ^ean>a9».asift^eiwiKBiowi Tetanio eonvulsioMi have in later times been
divided into twaspaoiio bnanohes d tetanrnHHudiopalhictaild traiUDatio.- We have heard
a great deal of these two descriptions of tetan«s^ One question my Lord asked, which,
was answered, by Dr. T^d^-^t would have been more satisfactory it my Lord had asked
what the meaning of the Rnriish of " idiopathie,^' viz. 8di*gBUfiratiQg,.was; the ansmrer
given to the question. What does idiopathic mean 2 was *' coUiti^tional^" True»but that
means nothing, or, if anythiag, it means '* unacoountable.''

Lord Campbell.' — Witiiout external injury.

Mr. Berjeant Bhe9. — Just so, my Lord ; without external u^ary, but attributable to no
known cause, unless in some few instances, perhaps, where there is some- injury in the
interior of the body ; but the meaning of the word " idiopathic '* is unquestionably what
I bavie stated ; not that it follows they never can be traced to a cause, but that they con-
stantly occur in whidi the cause may be attributed to one thing or to another, and ix^ that
isase we say that it is idiopathic tetanus, because we camiot with certainty say it is trau-
matic, that is, arising from any external injury.

Now, gentlemen^ we have had a great deal of evid^ce produced by my friend, directed
to show-^asmming that the dsease of which Mr. Cook died was tetanus — ^that it must have
been strychnia tetamus. It is a mere assumption' they begin with — ^the merest assumption
in the world. I will give you my reasons for saying so, and I think I am justified in
so* saying.- That the deceased died in convulsions is beyond alL question, or immediately
aft^x^onvulsioDs; that they were convulsions that had occurred exacdy or about the
same hour on the prevwus ni^ht, and something like those which had occurred on the
night preceding, something which he described as madness for two minutes, is beyond all
doubt. What pretence is ^ere for saying they were tetanus at all ? Mr. Jones was
examined, and I will read to you presently what the evidence he gave was. Mr. Jones,
in the copyof tfaed6petilMm& delivered to me, stated that Mr. Cook died of convulsions,
and in the'0(^ of the depcmtioDB, whioh he signed and read over md corrected, there was
not a word of tetanusi My learned Mend interposed^ and said, on looking to the original
depositions, it did appear that he bad mentioned it, and he said so because in the coirrse
of his examinatieii hefonaod' a halfi^written word, ^^tetinus** — ^he availed himself of it, not
uofhirly, to suggest^ tiiac though he did not positivdy say it was' tetanus, yet that what he
observed; was something whidh pat him in^mind of tetanus. It bore some of the charac-
teristics of a tetanie convaiBion; buty gentiemen, itmaydoso, and yet not be tetanus;
and I submit to you* that it is bad reasoning, and^ Twill prove it presently. I put a
question to the- witness on the^subject. It is ^bad reasoning to saj without positive proof '
^4he fact that if wiusi>teti^iis, audit caanoC be* tmiH u a tic tetanus because it did not appear
it 'had presented the dastmotl^tures ofitnuimiktlo tetamis, and therefore it mast be tetanus
by strychnia. That is the ailment. They assume it cannot be traumatic tetanus,
they have not disoovei«d the /poison^ but- stUl 'they say itiauAt be tetanus by poison ! '

Let' us see wheti^r > there - is • any pretence lor saying anything of the kind. My
lestrned friends may Mil mo, if lyou ventuPC'te impeach fieauthority of a man like Dr.
Taylor, who, though he had no^knowledge'on the subject, undoubtedly is a geirtleman
of great rea\^ng in his^frofessianjand a'geirtieman'whd'has Written a book^' which I will
not treat as a book not* worthy •of'beingSJttdtidedto because' I think it right on this
evidence te attack apartteulsr pefrt of ift^^if yon; choose to say his opinion is not to be
depended ' upoo^ it is incuvvbeat'on^yoQ to suggest seme^oljier-'tiieory of the cause of
Cook's^ death which will explain the evidence given, and prove not merely negatively
it is'uot what we say itwns, but prove affirmaiit^ely- it is- something else. I say I am
not called on to do any such thing. l^hrCtown^is the party; or rather those out of whose
hands this case hat been taken by- the Crown, who have thought proper to impute the
death of tiiis gentleman to the pcMen of strychnia; they have foUoi^d the trail which
has been dragged before thinn by these lexicologists ; and, relying on thetrjudgment and
dlsoretien, they have made quite sure they will be enabled to establish the fhct thst it

K 2

192 TRIAL OF WILLIAM PALMEB;

was not either by traaxnadc or idiopatkie tetanus irat by fetimrsftof ^ttyi^nia, tlmt heh^a
died. I say I am not bound : to svggeBt any theory u^ the Btibj^dt. It'catmot be
expected that in the defence I should do «>»iafid, in poitit of logic, ft id 6ot reasonable,
when we contradict the fiiet whtdi: it iu ibrth^n tb prove, that-our 'detoittl of tha^ ftkct
and ooff reasons should be weakened bcteaase Mrs dannot ^eonchijllTely'fix'the cattle of
death) or explain the cause of death xwaAy^&^et way^ If w« catt ^tisrty'yoii thst m
any one of the nuiaeraus^raricqtiei of coprv«4sionti'tihiS'gentl^tniB(n''tt4ght'have fiklleti, and
ipight have been -eitber a6phyxi^gt0d,''or fty 'toine'8tuid!i^'«^a6m'd^pfiMed dfli^ in a way
ditterent from a8pfayxia,>^t is quite «ilottgh> >fot< lis! ixupm^^' th«' j^obabiHt^df that,
unless they show oonclasi<rely'thatithe«irainns(tuteeb ttiid^ sym^^bMS 'Wbi<ih attended his
death are irreconcilable tinth laoiil )o4iber theory thatf thst lof tttyehtiiof ^oS^n. Lcf vtd &ee
what the symptoms Were.- Pwill take the iibeHy- oiP teading^thetto iHibf^ first* instance
from the depositions, because dtiitioBly 'fair to a perso&iKrhoMjudgintint I d}^pd^^
you should luLte jdaced-cleaiiy befbreyob the evid^nnoe -on' which thisy veify.' > >

(^TAe Cpwt liATG ad^'owme^ for a sKort time). , . . .- . /

Gentlemen, I have- oJ>«e^e'd in the cdnrse of this inquiry, whenever there has 'been
a question of what a Witness has said on a previous occasion before a coroner, my Lord
has thought it right to have the whoje of the document read. Now I propose to'reafl —
unless I am corrected by my Lord, when, of cOtirse, I shall immediately submit-^I propose
to read, foi* the purpose of my present inquiry, only that part of the deposition which
describes the sym^toiris.

Lord Campbell.— Tou may read any part of them, completing the sense of the part
which you read, .

Mr. Scrjecmi ^h^^'^l am much obliged to your Lordship ; and my object in so doiag
is this : I will read all the depositions of Mr. Jones, though in truth, in my view of the
ease, the depositloa of Mr. Jones is not so favourable to my case as lus evinoxce in open
court. If there be a difPeisence, the evidmce in open court is more £ivoucMe dian the
deposition ; but jsubstantially they are the same. What I propose to. do now. is to call year
attention to the statement of Elizabeth Mills and Mr. Jones before thd coroner of the
symptoms they observed in Cook on the Monday and Tuesday nighls; and haviag
done so, without accepting any challenge which may be made by my friend to account for
the symptoms* I will submit to your judgment, on authority which cannot deceive you,
whether those symptoms are not more probably accounted for by the convulsions which are
npt tetanic at all, and certainly not tetanic in its distinct character of strychnia tetanus, bot
to be classed under those general convulsions by which it constantly pleases Providence
to strike mip. down without leaving a. trace of their ooune in his- system^ -. Yon will find,
from th^ evidence we have heard m this case, because we > have ihad the opportunity of
hiearittg gent^m^nwho, although called against the prisoner, itre of the-hi^est respects-
bility ai)d the greatest learning in their professions, you havet. heard fi!om< them it fre-
quently .Jiappens — ^I do not mean so frequently as otherwise, beoMseasfiir as*I have been
a^te^to as^rtain some trace is generally foundof thedieease.whiohiis supposed to have
caujs^ d^athi-r-'tha.t a man in. the prime, of life is -struck down -in: a ' comnilsion wMeh
lefiyes np;t a trace of it in the body. This is what was zBeant'by.'the tenas. intsodnced in
ancient, tim£S< of dying by the visitation of God^ying. iD^y a /cOnToJsion^ the canse of
which .It pleased God that man should not.discoverj .It .mij^t also please the Almighty
t^at the cause of \t should be discoverable, and it &6qaently,iflj and gives evidence to mose
who .examine the body that the remote cause of loss.of life isr6om6lindis(aretion on the psrt
offt^e.4^?$^^ pf^rsou;. but jt constantly happ^i^ 4heroii»BatmDe at all.

Qe|[^tl|en)en, whc^t Z have to submit, to :y/cw is thiB»jthait(<tkei«ymploims deaeribed in the
d^si^ipn^of Elizabeth Mills taud Mr.. Jone^i^fjre suQh>aSitp]mf<kie'it quite ui^nstifiable to
resor^ito- the j^y pothesis of tetuaus. o^ any kusud, im«oh Imn of slaryehnia tetanus. You will
repoU^fltr^I w^ not repeat itc^the peqidiarityi of thejcoiistitution of this young man, and
the evi4|Bnce ;iof|ppc^ional [fimptiooalt<Uf^avii^gemeUt, not(pa.rticuhu:ly at that time, which
involye/graye jcpDsequeuoe$,.tpwhiph.I(hA^ei aliteady>eallediiyour attention. . I submit to
you, on ;t^tauitj^riUi^;9n m^tt^fs pf <tjbisikind«{it ismuoh miere probable that Cook died in
general coMVi4si(>ijVB^ii^pi)itetaiHo,(at.<a}^ithan .thftttiheidied from idiopathic, traumaitdc, or
strychnia tetanias* < -mi i»(i. i -i o ^1•\v■,/^ uu ;.• \< ■• ■ , •

I have mentu>ued(«M that I, inte?^ . toirsay, about- his botlily infirmities t let-ns now see
what has beiin the state, of. his miu44 He ^ent to the ^rewsbury. raeea in imminent
peril of leaving them, t^ ruined lUM^. • Mr» Stie^ens told Palmer, and we have heard
nothing to the contrary, Chat if .anybody had clwnH upon hhn» then? woald not be firar
thousand shillings, to meet them. Wjexnow, from the necessity under which he was to
raiiBc sums of money at exorbitant inteift^t, that hetmust have been in ciicumstanoes of the

SBVENTH QAY, May 21, 185B. 193

utmost* Qmbarrafisment-^tHftt it was tinpo88ible« moMtiy speskingv unless som^ woDderftil
success rOa thQ turf restoreci his fortuuAs, that he' eoiUd stand bis ground at all ; and it is
this state oi mmd, luad with bealtli, at all ey^uts, not Strang, and a constitution exceedingly
delieate, that lie had heen ibr a length lef time* cherishing the hope that Polestar, which
was hardly his, for, it was martgog^* and which mvst become another person's if it did
not win at ShrefwahuryT-rin atlireasonabW ptobahilily he had been cherishing the hope that
Polestar would wiut and that he. by tihat-WKHBing would possess himself at once of the
stakes, whicJn n^ lean^ fi^end statid«; and I think it waa i^ired, amoomted to nearly 400/.,
besides eoqie considerable winnbgst to>itheanlQnnt>of 600?^ or 70(H. by bets on the mare —
upwatds of t lOOO^M alto^ethisn. Tibftt has> been mentioned seybral times. Fancy the con-
dition ia which, that young /man . re«e < £rom hia bed 4Uk the Tnesday OMming. He must
have knownandifelt when'he.7V(«nt iovrn to breakfast, ''This night I am either a beggar,
or a man with: hopes of recoveciug myself, and widt the means* at least for the time, of
keeping up my aippearance of respeeM&lily." He/goes* to the mces: another race takes
place before his mare, Polestar, is brought to the goal. He waitA for it in a state of
feverish anxiety and expectation — the hour that intervenes appears to him everlasting.
At last the horses start, and his mare wins easily : Ijue- is thie; vyuuer of lOOOi. We may
suppose that to be the sum. What effect has it upon him.?, . Mr. Jones teUa us the effect.
He is nuable to speak for three minutes. He is saved^not merely ia purse buit in
honour and character — ^saved before his relatives and friends. He will not be a disgrace
to them yet, at all events ; he may retiieve his fortunes, and become SA honourable and
respectable man. Conceive him to be a man with right feelings — ^and it is not because a
man faHs into the ways of promiscuous licentiousness that he is d(}void of all honourable
feeling — conceive him to be an honourable man, a man who loved the uieinory of his
father and his mother, who valued the respectability of his family, and who had a desire
tQ appear before his sister, Mrs. Bradford, as an honourable man. Instead of being known
to her as a levanter and a blackleg, driven from all honourable society. The effect of
h^ success is that for three minutes he cannot speak, though he is with his intimate
friend Mr. Jones. He goes back to the inn, though he has to some extent recovered
himself, in a state of elation, of which it is juy duty to say that one man said he was not
more .elated than other people when they have won, but still, depend upon it, overjoyed,
and with a revulsion from the despair in which he was, which must have convulsed,
though not in a sense of immediate illness, every fibre of his frame. Hi6 first and his
uatund inclination was to entertain his friends, and he gives a champagne dinner. The
evidence is that he did not drink to excess ; tbat is the evidence r but he had cham-
pagne, and we all of us know that when there is champagne there are other things
besides, and it Tery often happens it is not because champagne is drank the company
do not drink as muoh of other wines. What in ordinary parlance is called a cham-
pagne dinner is a- good, luxurious entertainment, in which there is no stint and
not mueh self*restraint. I do not mean to say he was drunk. The evidence is he
rose- from table not drunk, and therefore it is not for me to say, and the evidence
will not justify nke, in saying, he was. That evening he did not spend inthe cou)l-
pauy of Jonee^ . I do not think it is very dear in whose company he spent it aftei^ the
dinner was o^vner; but* we -find him the next nirht, Wednesday, at the Un$corn, with
Saunders the tradner, Miv Palmer, and a lady. The next morning is cold and wet. He '
Went on the groundvand was observed by Herring* standing in the wet, and remonstrpcted;
'^th for so doing. He was taken ill that night, and ]rou will hear what his syilnpfoms '
^ere. I shidi cSu your attention to those \mSbt the tmrd head of what I have to addVesi^ '
to you. He sent for a doctor, who recomilnesxds an emetic. The poor man-siecmed to
know more about it than the doctor. He sahl h^ ooold do h with hot watfer and a tooth* '
brush. Perha|)S he* had oflen velievtad -his stooiaeh in that way. He was unwell that day,
and waa ailing till bis death at Rugeley. That is the general history, as far as the ikientid
excitement can be refbrved Do :' great resesou to apprehend ruin when he wenN; to Shrews-^
bury; immediate, sodden, yet only pat^tisil retjovchry fitoTti his embirn^sments k' Shrews^
bury; and home to Rugeley to meet them again in theiv fuU' Intensity,' all tiie Wiknings
and twioe the sum, to save him f^otitk' the ruin-'hle liad briought on himself.' All'^e '
property he appears to have had at the- 'tlm^' were Polestar and Sititis, aind thejr' wete
inortgaged for debts due to Pratt: Hetaiaiy'hafve'had sdme fii# hiindreds in money; It
is with a weakened body and an irritated and excited mind that he is affected with a
siobiess at Shrewsbury, which elings' tO'a'syS^^minett^^bVe of beiiiii^ t^eei^it^ by the
ordinary necessary food, without wnich thestroiigest man gives way^ excites his nerves,
and makes him in i;nmhQkent danger of fhlling' a vl«dm to any convulsive attacks to
whieh his constitution would be likely to be disposed-. Depend upcm it the tl^onghts of
that young ma&, when he retired to bed, were not the thoughts with which you lay
your heads upon the pillow. He had much to think of which he regretted, mhch to

194 TBIAL OF WILLIA^I PALUEB.

delibeiBte opoa wUch ins of a natoie io exdte in li!s mind the nMMt seriiMB Wpprt-
bensioDs. There was neither credit, nor honour, nor anTthmg' in fais career w hiA wmdii
make him respect himseli^ or respe^able in the eyes of others. His rest was only im-
perfect at the best, and after the gratificatioos of the animal appetite to which people in
some instances rsMirt to alleviate the mihappy recollections of ^be moment, he hsd m
fesonioe. He desired no somety so much as the society of Palmer. Kb icndenee wk
at the Talbot Arms, which was, in ftct, a residence with Palmer. He does not appev
to haTc had a ntting-foom to himself: he does not appear m have fi^qnentedthe eoffee-
room. He had a bed-room at the Talbot Arms, and fais real home, witere he often was,
and woald have been nearlj altogether but for his illness, was Pidmer's house ofer the
way. That was his eondidon at Bugeley. He is taken Tiolently ill oo Sanday night.
We had nothing but his own description of it ; but what is that description:? He had been
rniorly lor some time. For two nights he had been taking opium pills preseribed by ttr.
B a mfon L Mr. Bamfi>rd is an aged man, but there is no donbt a respectable man, ad a
man who would be likely, I think we may fairly infer, to oonsidcr what the complaint was
and prescribe accordingly. In the middle of the night, at twelTc o'clock, he iras
awakened ih>m a dream m a. state of affright. He says he was neariy mad ; he rans^ the
bell, bat nobody woold come.

I^rd CAMPBOOtJ-'-^He thought they woold not hear him ; he thought they had gone
to bed;

Mr. Serjeant Shee. — Yes, that is so ; I am mnch obliged to your Lordship. He statts
he was mad for two minates,-and what did he ascribe it to? Xothing but sadden
alarm by the noise of a qnarrel in the street. Doges that happen to as, gentlemen ? Does
it happen to those of as who live regalar lives, and who are of good aTerage coastitu-
tion ? .Do we awaken in a state that we can describe as madness, and without anymoc'v'
of acconntiag for the paroxysm but a quarrel in the stceet? It must hare been a very
high state of nervoos excitement. It must have been something yiolent while it lasted
— ^transient in its character — but something that arose from a disordered state of the
stomach and an agitated and anxious mind, probably in some degree ^ireakened by the
medicine he was taking, the calomel and the morphia, to which he had shown a great
reluctance, in which he placed little confidence, because Dr. Sarage told him he ought
not to take opiom, and therefore he would be to some extent coerced by the opinion c-
Mr. Bamford.

Mr. Babox Aldxbson. — ^That was calomel.

Mr. SkrjecaU Shec — It was so, my Lord. So that he was coereed, as it were, hrto
taking annething he did not like, because there was calomel in those pills. The next
day, the fiioiiday, he was well the whole day ; not well in the sense of being strong and
able to tak0 a walk in the fields, or mount his horse and gaHpp about the coontiT.
bat weU in the sense of being able to get up, alter trying to breakmst in bed, to talk of
sending for the barber, and, I belieTe, actually sending for him ; of seeing his trainer
■and 'his jodteys, and discnss his plans f(X his next campaign — w«l\ to' that extent, bat
nol cmt of his bed-room, taking no substantial food, not vomiting much that day, though
»* liittle i tiiink in the morning, which is ascribed by the theory of the Grown, or by
> those whole ease the Crown has been forced by public opinion or by pnldic excitement
to tadee-up, to Palmer's absence all that day. We do not hear that Cook took anything
iolid; We do not hear that he Innched at one o'clock, and then, as moet probaA>ly he
wad in the habit of doing, took his beefsteak and his leg of mntton, or-fais chickea, at
fite 'Orsix o'clodc. He had no insuperable dislike to brandy-and-^water: he conld, on
an octasion, take his glass or two, though Palmer was not there ; but he does not appe&i;
to hare been in the condition, ill as he was, to have any gratification in load or drink of
•ay.kifld'; and Pabner was in London all the time. Then, in the middle of thenieht
at twelve o'clock, be is seized with a paroxysm, which Elizabeth MiUs describes, vfe
wifl. tttke her description t — {The learnt Serjeant here reed a poriion of tke dep&iitiff^ (f
ElizabetK MilU*)r-^That is the account of Cook's illness on Monday night. It might
have .'been a'mnch less serious fit than the one On the Sunday night. Nothing took place
which ooald justify any man in saying that he was mad for a minute'— nothing of the
kind. But letus be fair. Afterwards, in talking of it, he says, speaking to Elisabeth Mills,
** Did yoa ever see anybody in such agony as I was last night ? " We have the desorip-
tion of SUiaibeth Mills, and his own statement afterwards ; " I saw him a^ain abooC seten
o'doek, and he a^ed me whether I ever saw anybody in snch ^agony as he was the jpre*
vioos night." Not to tie the yonng woman down td a word, the fair inftranceofthe
whole of that statement is that for some time during the whole of that paroxysm he was
'-^ pain, and in great pain, but that he never lost his senses. He oonldnot very well be

nch a state as that which he described on the Sunday ntg^t. Nov let us 'have the

SEVENTH DAY, MfT 21, 18^ 195

s^Sitt9meal^.o^Mv^^Qfi9ih'^b/i^is, we must take it, a perfec^y competent maD, and wl&ose
evidtpoa.awt be. attended to. Mr. Jooies was requested to go tliere hj Palmer, Palmer
lM^¥i9g wiittea to Jum o& the Sunday. He was sot able to go then hein^ himself
ii»dispo8^ iwd he owiJUi not get there till Tuesday. ' He went there on the Tuesday, aad
^t tiicre by thr«« o'clock, and he was for some time with Cook alone.

Naw« ju9t observe th^ oonsequeoce of that, looking at the circumstances of this ease.
Mr. . JoiMB was tl^ie most intimate friend, as far as we can judge, that Cook had.
Prebably h« wm. lie La4 ^ great regard for Mr. Stevens, who had been the husband of
h«» mother, buthewas«Qt so intimate with Mr. Steveus. Mr. Sterens was probacy a
genUeiwui who did «9t afiprove — ^in &Qt^ he frankly told us he disapproyed— of ihe
eottrse Cook- was j^ufsui^g. Probably he was more austere to him during life than
we sk^ovild. imagine from th^ way he speaks pf him after death. His best friend seems to
fasre been Mr. Jones. No doubt Mr. Jones, though he was a respectable man, did not
take on himself to rebuke or reprove Cook for what he might think it not correet
todow He lived in his house at Lutterworth* and 'appears to nare bi?en on such good
term& with Cook that FaLoier knew it would not be disagreeable to Cook if Mr. Jones would
come and stay and sleep in the same bedroom, and so long as he required the attendance
of a friend ; and, as far as we can understand, Mr. Jones has Cook to himself from
three to seven o'clock. He has him to himself for some considerable time. Tmi know
part of the suggestion in this case for the Crown is that Cook thought* that Fdmer
had played false with him at Shrewsbury ; part of the suggestion in this ease is that
Cook thought at Shrewsbury Palmer laid a plan for circumventing him, and of getting
his money. Here is Cook with Mr. Jones two or three hours before 'Palmer comes.
Palmer Pontes with Mr. Bamford I think about seven or eight o'clock.

Mr. Barom Alderson.—'No ; he came immediately after Mr. J«aes, aad'was in and
oat of the room.

Mr. Serjeant Shce, — ^However, Mr. Jones had the opporttinity, during the aftenoon,
if Cook had wished it, of being the recipient of the whole confidence of Cook; Oeolc mi^t
have said to Mr. Jones, ** I am glad you have come ; 1 have been acting the fool with
Palmer ; I suspect him ; I think he means to get my money."

The AUoi-ney^Gctural. — You must not say that. You would not let me ask him any
questions about it

Mr. iSeijeant Shee, — ^I do not say that it did pass. I use it in this way : it might hf^ve
passed, and that it did aot is clear, beeaase Mr. Jones entertained no suspicion of the
fcasd ; he having been with Cook during the whole of the evening shows that it did not
paas, and that nothing occurred in the entire and unbounded confidence whieh may be
aapfMsed to have .eiusted between^ Cook and Mr. Jones, to raise a suspicion in the
mind of Mr. Jooes ; and so jnuch was that the case that, at the consultation which took
plaoe between seven .and eight o'clock on Tuesday evening, between Mr. JoAes md
Palmer and. Mr. Banifocd, as to what the medicine ought to be, die fit of the Monday
nig^t was never mentioned; it was not alluded to at all.

Gentlemen, that. is.. a veiy remarkable fact; it is remarkable in two ways; the
Crown might say it is remarkable in this sense : that Palmer knew it, and said not a *
waged alx>ut it, BntXt seiE^ms it was a matter, in the opinion of Cook, bo litlile serious,
that he never said a word of it to Mr. Jones, because, if Cook had thought that
those words which he. used to Elizabeth Mills were not an exaggerated desoriptioofof
what had occurred, do you not think, when Mr. Jones came td see him, and flelt his
pidteand inquired what his symptoms were, that Cook would have said (hebeiv^in
foil possession of hia senses) **you cannot judge now fVom my appearance how •! «m
-rl was ina state of raftdness last night — I was in the greatest possible agony— 1 4oinot
hmaiw what it was — I was attacked in the middle of the night in such a way that I
1iiou|^t I was going to die" ? As. he had Mr. Jones with him, would he not hate men-
turned that in the conversation ? My inference from that is, that in all probahiKty this
iest statemeogt of Elizabeth Mills was the coi^rect statement of what oeeUrred ;• hnd if^we
^nd it is consistent with what Mr. Jones says &s to what occurred the next night in
hs general character, it would be very uearly the same on both" mights. We may
mssoBably imfer that anything in €^ccss of that, on which the medical evidenee was
given, has been the result of imagination, and not so strictly consistent -with the tmth
as the original statement. Let us^see what Mr. Jones says. (The learned Serjeant read
a portion of the deposition of Jfr. Jozies before the Coroner.) Observe the signifficanee of
that. Palmer, in the presence of Mr. Jones, brings up two pills, which it te Strpposed
were the {uUs that poisoned him — ^pills containing a substance wiiich sometimes does its
work in.a quarter ot an hour, which has done it in less, but never hardly exceeds half
an hour I and so we are to be aske4 to believe that Palmer, Jones bang present, and

196 TBUL OF WltLIAil P.AUIER.

Cook in bis presenoe objeeting to take tlie pilla, pentiTely Ibneed them down hi* thfoit,
at the inuniBent peril of his SlliDg dovn, like the rabbit, in tw6 er thrae nunvtM after-
irards in convalsions eTidently and manifestly tetamc He st&tea what did take place.
{The learned Serjeant read a further portion cf Mr. Jtmafs depetiUm.) Bat, as i am
reminded bj one of my Lords that in the course of the examination of Mr. JoMs tlie
irord *' tetanus " is used, it is right I shocld say a word on tint, lest I should forget it.
The word " tetanus " is not in the depoffltion, and it is ve^ remarkaMe-^it is one of
the most extraordinary thiogs, as showing, when penaas Hcve got a tiieory into their
heads, how they will fag it, and 8ti>elch it to its Tery ntmdsc, and make it ;fit and
fall into the exact place into which they wish it to go« We have it in the evideuoe cf
Dr. Taylor, that on the oecasion of the inquest he sat next to Mr. I>eane, the attomey^s
clerk, and suggested the qnesticMM which it was neeessary t» put, in his jndgnieiit, ia
order to elicit the whole truth as to the symptoms of Oook. Now, fancy Dr. Taylor,
who has had a letter teUing him it was strychniar-^that there was a snspeion of
strychnia ; fancy Dr. Taylor, who had all but made up his mind to state poeltitely ot>
his oath his opinion that the pills, on Monday and Tvcsday, contained strrehaia-'-^-

The Attomey-Gejieral. — ^You are misled on a matter of fact with regard to that. I am.
told, and, if necessary, I will ask the question, that Dr. Taylor \ras cot present "when
Mr. Jones was examined. Tou say He suggested the questions.

Mr. Serjecad Sh^e, — I did not mean to misrepresent anything. Mr. Deane was there.

7 The Attomey-General, — ^Xot on that occasion at all.

- Mr. Serjeant >S^.-^Then the observatioft does not arise. I thought it might iairly be
that the suggestion which had been put forward by the Crown was the suggestioa of
Dr. Taylor. I do not think it is impossible that Mr. Jones, when he gave that evideoee,
had in his mind's eye what he had seen that night and not seen very correctly. Heiiad
not light enough to see the patient's face. There was only one candle, and he oould not
tell Mliether there was axiy change in his countenance on the Tuesday — a very important
symptom. They say it cannot have been traumatic, because there is a peculiar expresskn
in the i^ce — ^aract which nobody observed. It was too dark, in this case of Cook's, to
take notice. Mr. Jones gave his evidence, and he is a competent professional man, and
it is quite dear that the notion of tetanus, or tetanic, tetanifbrm, or something like
tetanus must have entered into his mind, because the clerk has put down " tetinus ;" he
probably had not h^rd of the word before, and the probability is, something like it vas
Qsed. He said he did use it, and afterwards it was struck out and Mr. Jones correeled
his deposition, read it all over and signed it, and left it with the word stnick out. There aie
strong symptoms of ** compression/* that is one word struck out ; then afterwards there is
the Avord ** tetinus/' and then those two words are struck out. with Mr. Jones's entire ap-
probation, because othemise ;he would have corrected it when he signed. it; and he said
he read it over, and the words ^* violent convulsions '* were sobslstated. What is the fair
inference from that ? — ^that the man who saw Cook in the paroxyna did not think hsmself
justified in saying it was tetanus. It might be Tery like ; it might have a tetamform
*i^ppearance ; but it was not tetanus. ' ...

Gentlemen, I will call your attention to the features of general oouTulslons. I cross*
examined sevcml of the medical witnesses, for the purpose of Jsxdaoing what X coonder
to be a true belief as to this case, that the convulsions in which Cook died were not
tetanus properly speaking, or tetanic properly speaking^ t but .that ihey- wei-e convulsions
of that strong and violent character which are teianiform, though not classed under
idiopathic or traumatic tetanus, but under the head of general ^owvnlsions.

Gpntlemen, X now propose to read a description .of geaeeali convokions from the work
of Dr. Copland. I, espied the attention ■ of the very learned gentlemen who were
Examined for the Crdwn to what was Uid down in that work, which is admitted to be one
of authority, and I .cannot conceive how you, to whpm this matter of fact is to be sub-
mitted, 9an form an opinion whether or not my theory; or rather my belief, that he died by
fhe visitation of <7od, in violent gjsneral , cpnvijdsions, he a probable one, unless joa
hear from what w^ npt. written ibr the purposes of this ease what the features of
general convulsions are ; so, if you please, I wiU read to you what X have myself copied
from the work of Dr. Copland. • - .

The Attomey^Creneral 6bjected to 'Dr. Coplatid*s book being read, unless he was called
at a witness.

Mr. Serjeant Shee, — I read it to one of the witnesses. — ^This X may say, as X am upon
the point, that the only persons in the profession who can be supposed to have any com-
petent or reliable information on the subject of tetalnus^ not traumatic* • are physicians;

SEVENTH DAT, May 21, 1856. 107

««td ifiotcHie i>ta>'sioian-*-i}m>per]y so speaking-^noi one of that most honourable body of
men who see t£be 6ti<idea attacks of patients in their beds, a^id not in hospitals, has been
CftUed to speak to this. < Dr. Todd vas called, aad Dr. Todd gxve his evidence in a way
to comoiand the reapeei of everybody ; bat Dr. Todd is a gendenian whose practice does-
aot vpp&LT to have been so mnch that of aphysieian ac that of a surgeon ; he is physician
to the King's CoUi^ HospiteV^andhaifr hM that office- about twenty years; he has-
lectured on diseasoSiOf the nervous s^atem and'tetanuS) but iie does not appear to have-
been a physieian in< general piraetioe. - .!'.•..'

Genilem6in» I am la«tracted I shall bo able to show ^by eminent men that what I am
about to read from Dr. Copland's book, as part< of my epeeoh, is a true description of
coavnlsiond that ai% not < idiopathic or traomatie, 'bivt' of a general kind. He first
gives the definition of ^^G«nera^Goiivukion8/' whieh he says are " violent and involuntary
«onlraetiims of a part^ Or of. tho whole of the faodty, sometimes with rigidity and tension
(tonio oonvnlsiooa), but more frec{.a«ntiy with tumuhnous agitatiOns> consisting of alter-
nating ahocks (clonic oo&>rulBion8), that come.' on Biiddenly,' dither in recurring or in dis-
tinct pavoixysmsv and after irregolar.and unadrtai^ intervals.^'t We will see what he says
abont it: — ** If we take the character of the spasm in respect of permanency, rigidity^
relaxation, and recurrence as a basis of arrangement of , a)l the diseases by abnormal
action of involuntary muscles, we shall have every grade, passing imperceptibly from the-
most acute form of tetanus through cramp, epilepsy, eclompsia, convulsions, &c., down
to the most atonic states of chorea andtremoari Aleo^ 9f 'w^ e^c^nslder the aiFections called
convulsions, and which are usually irregular in th^ir .forms> with reference to the
character of the abnormal contraction of the muscles, we shall see it in some cases of the
most violent and spastic nature, frequently of some conliniialiee,' the relaxations being of
Ixief duration, or scarcely observable, and in others nearly or' aHbgether'appi'oaching to>
tetimic. • These constitute the more tonic form of comvaUions; !^m whith there is every
possible grade, down to the atonic or most clonic observed in' chorea or tretaour. The
premonitory signs of general convulsions are (inter alia) vertigdanddiz^fin^ssr, irritability
of temper, flushings, or alternate flushing and paleness of the face, nattsea, retehing, or
voBiiting, or pain and distension of the stomach or left hypochbndrium,'utiusaal flatulence
of the stomach and bowels, and other dyspeptic symptoms. In many instances the
general sensibility and consciousness are but very slightly inipaired, particularly in the
more simiple cases, and when the proximate cause is not seated in the 6nCephalon ; but
in proportion as this part is affected primarily or consecutivelv, and the neck and face
tumid and livid, the cerebral functions are obscured, and the convulsions attended by
stupor, delirium, &c., or pass into or ftre followed by these states. The paroxysm may
eease in a few moments, or minutes, or continue for some or even maiiy hours. It
generally subsides rapidly, the patient experiencing at its termination fatigue, headache,
or stapor, but he is usually : restored in ^a short time to the sam:e state as before th^
seizure, which is liable- to rebur in a person once afi^ted, but at uncertain inteWalsu
After repeated attacks the fit sometimes becomes periodic (the convulsio * recurrens df
authors); The most' conunon causes are (inter alia) all emotions of the mind which excite
the nervous power and' determine the blobd to the head, as joy, anger j religiotis.
enthusiasm,' excessive desire, &c., or those which greatly depms the nervous iiiflUen'ce,
Bs well! as diminish and det^aft^ the actions of the heart, as fear,'terror,ankiety, sadiiessw
distressing intelligence, frigh^l dreams, &;0., the syphilitic pOiSon and rept^lsioii 6f tp'iii
<»* rheumatism." ' ■• ' • ■ ■. • , ■ a , '•■' '• ■ |

Now do you believe -that if Di*. Taylor had read that befca* he went tothii mqiie^t
he would have dared «o stty ^at' this man di^ '6f strychnia poison ? Is ther^ one single
symptom, in the stateiatettt made -in the deptfeitidtas of Elizabeth MJlli and Mr. Jbjifes; ^

surgeons of hospitab-^ho never See^tfny thing' hardly ei^Jeptit is '6f that "n^tiire, ihkt is,
of the traumatic kind-^gfi^lfemeta, donbt sn^^o^ that I snonldbedipi^blc 'of speaking
clisrespeatfully of Sir Beajamin Brodlej-^* 4[>f atny<Jf the g6ntl^m6ti caH6d i^^bfepV m terms
of the highest respect ; but the^ d^e strf^ttb of hdS]f)itals, lind' bbtaitf a^ certain 6xp6ri-
ence as to those misfortnneS tmder'wBieh,''t4rcWi^h''*ibleti6fe,'the huiailli frtod sntfers;
who have not so much opportunity of witnessing and of ktiowiilg' tfie^ syntfptom's of the
class of convulsions which constantly attacb.neopl^iin th^^ own resideno^ in; the dead
of the night — ^those convulsions which hea£ of families and brothers and. sisters ai©
niost anxious to conceal from anybody but the medical man — those convulsions, the
known existence of which deprives a young 'Fortran of the hope, or a young man of the
hope of marriage. It is the men who have Ifeat sort of experiemce^the general prac-
titioners-^men who enjoy the entire c^nfidende of numerous families, and have tho

Id8 TEIAL OF WILLUN FAUffiB.

cpportaaity of. viniii^, in tli« 'wvgr of their ppofeattoo, the j^oor at tfadr lowly -dvellMifiis^
snffering vnder 8iid4itn eonvolsioas when affected . by serious disease ; those are &
men that we want to tell aa about oonvukioaa. Do not iet me mislead you £pr a mo-
ment—the eridcDee I have read to yon is not the whole of the eyidence of Klizabeth
BiiUs. There is her evidenee^ differing in aone material jparticulars from the eyidence
given by her before the Garaner. As to Mr. Jonas, the evidence .does not so much differ^
tfaoogh there may be some particulars in which there is a difference — and there is oae
remarkable one : he said in his depositions, ** the body w^ resting on itahead aod its
heds;" but in hia evidence he says, "it was so bent that if it had been turned on its
back, it would, or mip:ht, have resied on its head and its heels " — ^that is, if it did not rest
on the beck ; bQt he m suhstaoce saya it did. Mr. Baoiford says he ibond it resting on
its head« its back, aad Its he«da,, thereby excludiaig the supposition that a part of the body
was not supported by the back, liawever. before X go to that, perhaps you will permit
me to call yoiir attention to tiie symptoms of traumatic disease, Sly belief is, and I
sabmit it to yon, and it is what. I shall hope you yill confirm by your verdict, tiiat diis
complaint was not tetanus at all, but it was^aecording to this descripUon — ^the description
to which I will call your attention— ^it -may well have been, some form of traumatic
tetanus or idiopathie ietanus — ^there being no broad general distinction or certain coo&ie
between idiopathic or self^generatiBg tetanus, or tetanus not arising from any extreme
hurt or any violence to the interior part of the system ; and many forms of convulsions,
that is tetaBBform,iape pret^much the same as idiopathic tetanus, and we have had
awmbrm of medical gentlemen who have told us they never saw a case of idiopathic
tetanus. The answer to that is, you have -had very lixnited experience. They are not
Tery freqmeoit ; but thare are gentlemen here who have seen cases of idiopathic tetanus,
and they ave not >of an^ unfrequent 'oocurrence by any means. There is one gentlenum
who is here, and mheaaa. I will call before you— a gentleman who attended at the bed-
aide of the lady at I^eeds^who was suffering under strychnia, who has himself seen ioar
GttMS of idiopaAicttetamis ; and there are other gentlemen here who have seen thejni
tiso : they are not so rare, but they very carely Ml under the notice of suigeoas of
hos|>ltals; thay are<*ot so frequent as traumatic tetanus: cases of traumatic tetanus do
fi«qtteatly SttperveBe from the operations of the surgeons tiiemselves ; sometimes after
operations^ however skilfully performed, a lockjaw is the consequence. The persons
to. give you inlormation on the subject «re the general practitioners. Dr. Watson is a
ganeral praotixioiier — let us see what he says: — (^TJie learned Serjecmt read a pasdoge frm
Ue wwk of Dr. Waiwii\

Now we shall see that, none of those .symptoms which were spoken to on the day of
the inquest by Elizabeth Mills aod Mr. Jones may not range under one of those forms
of tetaiHis, the idiopathie or traumatic. The idiopathic mingling in all directions with
general violent cpttv^idsions is not to be distinguished from them* inasmuch as convulsions
have constant tetaniform ^pearanees ; and the meaning I take it, of that, is this :—
it is true:,, aa Dr. Watson says in a passage which I called to the attention of one of their
witnessesr^it istmeithatin ^hu: cases out of five traumatic tetanus begins with a sei^re
,of the lower jaw, uatess, as Sir Bet^amia Brodie tells us, it may begin, as it did in two
eases which he attended^ many, many years ago, in the limbs. He told us' so when he
was hene ; it. began there -before it attacked the jaw; but generally trismus or lockjaw is
the fimt symptom ; but there is a fi£th case in .whi<^h it is not, and Mr. Curling told us
that that was. about the proportion — foyr out of five; so that even traumatic, or that kind
of •tetanus iwhlch«ets. in after a wound, ages not always begin with some affection of the
jaw -or neck. Now, gentlemen, having gone so far, and having endeavoured to satisfy
. yon that tfaetsjrmptoms which were spoken to by those two witnesses on the despositions
BHiy be tii.e symptoms, as I think — that is to say, as I am told, having no experience of
ti\y own in the ma^tex^-^that these symptoms are rathei; referable to that violent description
of general fCOuvulsions than to any form of tetanus, let us go to the question, whether
or not the symptoms are consistent with what we know of tetanus produced by strych-
luae, because, if.wa are satisfied on a fiUl inquiry that they are not consistent with, the
symptoms unquestioiiably produced by strychnia tetanus, then the hypothesis of the
Crown entirely £»ils, and John Parsons Cooii cannot have died of strychnia poison.

Now, gentleBen, whether that be so of not will depend in a great degree, as it strikes
me — ^but of course it* is entiarely for you — on what you think of the evidence of Elisabeth
Mills; butt before. I 'go to the evidence of Elizabeth Mills I will call your attention to
what the description. of strychnia tetanus is, as, given iis by two very eminent gentlemen
who were calUd the oth^ day for the Crown-— Dr. Taylor and Dr. Christison; and if we
find on looking at it that, that description of the poison of strychnia tetanus, given by
them, is a different thing. from the picture first given of the complaint, of the paroxysms
'^^ ^-hA Pansons Cook by ^Uzabeth Mills and Mr. Jones, I think it would be ratiier too

SEVENTH DAT, May 21, 1856. 199

bad on their me^e opinion to say tlutt ihia is strydhnlft tetanus. Let its take Dr. Ta^lor^
description of strychnia tetanus : I am not sure whetlier Dr. Taylor stated he head ever
seen strychnia tetanns in the human subject; faowerer, "we must be jost to Dr. Taylor.
Dr. T&ylor has had an eittensive reading upon die subjects upea wfaieh lie writes, and it
is not to be supposed that Dr. Taylor would hastily set down m his book what He did not
find established on high authority; tbete£M%, though hrring it at seoondhand, Dr.
Taylor knows ^Omethln^ upon the sdbjiect.

Now Dr. Taylor, in his work on strychnia poison, has this pnder the head of stryebnia,
** that from five to twenty minujbes after the poison has been swallowed the patient is
suddenly seized with tetanic sympto;nt»,|iffeetiiig' the whole of the mnsoular system ; the
body becomes rigid, the limbs stretched out, and tbe .jaws so 'fixed that considesable diffi-
culty is experiencea in introducing 'anytlting' into the itenith." On both the depontioos
s^nd the other evidetice it is stated that Mr. Cook "i^as 'sitting up in bed beating the bed-
clothes, frequently telling the people about Mm to go forPaJaier, asking for the remedy,
and willing to take whatever was given him ; th«re was uo coDsiderabie difficulty in intro-
ducing anything into the mouth, and the paroxysms, instead- of be^nning within from five
to twenty minutes after the poison was supposed to have been swaUowed, did not begin for
an hour and a half afterwards. Dr. Taylor Airther on states, "^ after seTesal such attacks,
increasing in severity, the patient dies as^iyxtated.'' — Hiat tbere were some of these
symptoms in this case there can be no dotbt, and there will be some of them in every ease
of violent convulsions, yet it is not tiie description of sueh a case as that of John
Parsons Cook. Now, let us see what Dr. Christison says : '*The symptoms produced by
strychnia are very uncommon and striking: the animal begins to tremble, and is seized
with stiffness and starting of the limbs. Those sytnptums increase till at length the
animal is attacked by general spasms." Is that tiie deseripfion of either of liiese paroaip
ysms ? Who can say with any degree of truth tjiat it is ? Just dbserre these last indi-
cations of strychnia tetanus, which are eon^stet with all the eases'alated in tbcsr books.
It is only justice to those gentlemen who have taken pains to look to the authorities to
which they, refer, to say that the statements ^hioh they give of their cases are in the main
correct, but not in all their details. The books would be five times^ their sine if tfaev
were ; but they are in the main correct, when we look to the-ftnttign spathorities on wiiieh
th&y are founded : — ** The fit is then succeeded by an interval of calm, during^ which the
senses are impaired or are unnatiuaily acuto; but anotiier parcotynm seen sets in, and
th€sn anodier and another, until at last a fit occurs more violent' tiian any that had pre-
ceded it, and the animal perishes sufibeatod.** I know exacdy what Dr« Christison mtstmm
by this, because there is a gentleman here who will state an experiment whieh I saw
myself; it was an experiment, and for the purpose of this ease, or to assist me; andT
disagree with Dr. Taylor that there can be a moment's hesitation in saorlfienig ten or
twenty dogs for the purpose of ascertaining the truth of tWs theory when a maxPs li^is
involved. These experiments were performed by Dr. Letheby while I was tht<rs. I 'will
state them to you, because he will prove it by and by. A dog had some' strychnia pNlt
in his mouth, one grain, and then fiir about — I cannot be sare^as to the timeexa^I^,
but about twentv or twen^-five minutes — I cannot be sure, it might not be sotntiefF>~l8e
dog was perfectly wen. There were two rabbits on the tsMe which weretibsittt<Jdsor teMie
subjected to the operation, and the dog, when the chain was snffielently lelaited to eaaMe
him to do so, showed all the indications which a dog naturally does to get afC the rabWte ;
he was pulling at his chain, and was smelling and pawing and takmg an interest ift'lfhe
rabbits; suddenly it fell down On its side, audits legs were stretched out in a •itibst
violent way. ' It panted, and then it remained fbr some time— two or three minutei^U
quiet, occasionally a little jerking, but generally quifet. It recovered ag^axn fiwr a tlnife,
got up and looked at the rabbits, but was dizzy, seemed'afraid -to move; and, if iydu
touched it, shi^ddered and twitched, to use 'Miss'Elltabeth MHls's desoript&on ; 'seeo^M
to be afraid, and after another moment down it went again. It got ttp agahi, aad^doFffn
it went again, and at last it had a tremendous struggle, and it died. Thtt is 'what Dr.
Christison means by this description ; it would be true if the dose had been a strong
one. If the dose had not been sufficient to kill the dog, it wouki p robhb ly be a' longer
time— at least, 1 suppose so— in producing its eflfect, and t*re n&ters(^ 'between 'die
paroxysms, as stated by Dr. Taylor and Dr. Christison, wottW get- less andless, ointil at
last the animal would recover. If the dose is strong enoughto kill, th^nteMlbetwefen
the - - - n-f-^ ^.

are

was told immediately before its death — just

and as free as it is possible to conceive the limbs of an animal to be ; whichever way

you placed them after the animal is quite dead, if you place Ihem in any form, the

riffeor mortis comes on,iand they remain in the position in which you plaAse them. Dr.

200 . TRIAL OF WILLIAM PAL5IER.

Cbristison sayg they assume rigidity. I saw tills operation performed, and also onihe
two rabbits, and their symptoms were substantially the same, and their limbs in both
cases were quite as flaccid inmiediately on death. The animals daring the time of th?
intervals between the paroxysms were exceedingly touchy, and seemed afraid of being
touched at all ; if you were to touch them, they would shrink away. It was more so in
the dog ; it was in fact a sort of shudder — ^that is what Dr. Christison means.

Now, gentlemen, without going through the whole of these details, I will state to you
my reasons for saying, on the authorities and from my study of the books of those two
gentlemen, that according to QxeiF principles this cannot have been strychnia poison.
Now, I object to the theory of its being strychnia poison, first, on this ground, that no
case can be found in the books, in which the patient while the paroxysm lasted has had
so much command over the muscles of animal life and voluntary motion as Mr. Cook had
on the Monday and Tuesday nights. Tou heard that Mr. Cook was sitting up in his bed,
that Mr. Cook was beating the bed*clothes, that Mr. Cook was talking and crying out
for Palmer, and to Tiave the remedy given to him ; that Mr. Cook, so far from being
afraid of people touching him, asked to have his neck rubbed, and it was rubbed.
There is not a nngle instance in the books of Dr. Taylor, or in the books of Dr. Christi-
son, or any other books of any mescal man describing the symptoms of the strychnia
poison, in which the well-known symptoms the maUensio took place — not one, and it is
inconsistent with their descriptioo, and what I tell you will be the proof Dr. Letheby
will give of the experiment that I saw, and of many others he has performed. The animal
has not the power to do it, it is fixed in that way, there is nothing like it in any of their
own books ; wherefore, I submit to you on that part of the case — ^I will not weary you
by reading .their (books, because they very frankly stated when I asked them — ^I do not
know that I should use a hard term, because they think proper to believe in their theory
and are desirous of promoting it ; but I cannot but think — ^and I shall not be understood as
saying that they wotdd state deliberately what they believed to be untrue — but I cannot
help Slinking, as I said before, that they are fagging this theory to death.

I will go to the next point on the ground of which I say this is not strychnia poison.
I say there is no authentic case of tetanus by strychnia in which the paroxysms were
delayed so long after ingestion of the poison as in this case ; no authority and no
authentic report, by which I mean no case recorded in any work of authority, eveu
an authority less than the authority of these two honourable and respectable gentlemeo,
can be found in which the paroxysms have been delayed so long a time after the
ingestion of the poison as in this case. I will refer, however, to their own statements,
knowing that they are here. — (^The learned Serjeant read an extract from Dr, Taylor^ shook.)—
There was one case to which his attention was called, it was not a faital one, but it
pot better, and stSI he says the symptoms were those which he described, and tiiought
It was too )at^ to get the poison out of the stomach, as in half an iHjnr it had got into
the eirenlaition'r wfaAt can be more dear? it is a broad distingni^^g- future in the
strychnia. The interval which took place between the ingestion of the poison in Mr.
Cook's case, and the time when the paroxysm commenced, was much too long, three
times' too long^to indicate the effect of poison by strychnia. It oaftnot be pretended it
was a slBHlar oliso,.if the symptoiiM are ptvporiy des^bed, a» I wffl presently call your
attOftCion'to thent, by J^itabetfa Mills in her statement in this court* Now, gentlemen,
thirdly I «iitmiit, and I will prove, that there* li no casein which recovery from a paroxysm
of strfchnia poison has been so rapid as in Cook's 'caseon Monday night, or in which
a psitientkas enjoyed so long an interval of repose' oi< "exemption 'from its symptoms after
they had on^set \k. It is a very vemas1taUe'featut«, if it betircie^if I am right in
saiying «hat there is no oase in which recovery has beeti so rspid' as in Mr. Cook's case on
]Vfon£ry nw^t^'foliowed by so long an interval of relief from the paroxysm. In fact, in
this case of Mr; Cobkis, on the theory of theCrown, it wonld not have come on again if a
second dose> htA tMt been given. There was an end' of it when Eiitiabeth Mills left Palmer
sleeping by ^^Mf side *^ his friend in ^the urm^^ham Howeasy it would have been for
him th^ki, (if h^hndibeen disposed, when f^zabeth* Mills had gooe to bed and had retired
to her room^^toi ^Ve oalled •t)Ut to h^ thait' Mp;iCook'w«5 in another fit, and to have
killed him; aihMSt!w«Oi(^t suspioion on the; part of anybody. No^ let us see ir hat
Dr. Taylor ^^6i^^^ letkmidSetj^'kbt^a^ u p&9$a^ from Dr, Taylor* s book tchic/t has
before been r0/&#r«icf '^.»)^That> is ^what Dr. OhrislisOfl tells us in general terms, that these
convulsions are'tuoceeded^by intervals of oalmj' during which the senses are unnaturally
and unusvally acute; a<Jothei"fit then* begins; -it subsides^ and is succeeded by another
and another, till at length a fit takes ]^aOe vt^re violent than any before it, and the
animal dies suffocated. Here, I submit to you^ is a distinction between the case of
Mr. Cook and that which these genl^men state to be the distinguishing featoie— in that
there is no recurrence.^ — (^The learned Se/jeaint read a passage from Dr, ChristisoH's book,}--

SEYJBNTH 1>AY, >Uy 21, J8$Q. 201

Is that the. ca<« of JAr, Cpok ? Is it invariable? , How can they, not finding the poison

at all/ and the features differing altogether iVom the description in their own books,
be villing to give evidence tending tq conclusions that Mr. Cook died by strychnia poison
admiuistered by the prisoner at the bar ?

Now I will con^e to another feature of the disease, the post-mortem symptoms of the
disea^. I am told, and it certal^y was so in the case of the animals I saw killed, and
I saw three animals killed^ of which I have spoken to yon, and Dr. Letheby was good
enough to have dug up from his garden ^ rabbit which had been killed by strychnia,
and to open it before me, to examine the. heart, and the heart was full ; the heart of the
dog vra^ quite full, and the hearts of the two rabbits which I saw killed were quite full —
as full as they could possibly be. I^ow I am told, but it is a matter for you, by
the gentlemen whom I will call, who have not been afraid of does, and who have
found means of giving them the poison without losing any portion of their fingers, and
who have also treated rabbits and I believe some other animals in the same way — cats
and foxes, ^nd many kipds of animajs — I am told that the result of an enormous pro-
portion of such examinations has been, and, if properly conducted, of all of them, that
the hear^ is full on the right side invariably. 1 am told if they do the thing clumsily
they may get lin empty heart — that is, if they open the head £rst and cut through some
of the large arteries of the head or the throat, the head, in the act of the operation,
lying back, the blood from the heart will escape, and, by its mere gravitation, will rush
towards the vessels of the head. That has been one of the things they did not go into.
If they had killed more rabbits they would have known n^ore. about it : and not having
chosen to extend their experience — I am not now alluding to pr. Cpristison, because
he tried a wild boar, and that is as much as any man can be expected to do — but not
wishing to extend their experience of domestic animals, they have not had the same
opportunities of forming an opinion as operators more ruthless, if you please, but greater
lovers of science, and more anxious to make the inferior animals, at some little un-
pleasantness to themselves, conducive to the benefit of man and the improvement and
extension of science ; and, I will say, for no cruel objects, but worthy objects, and no
better proof can be given that they were good than this caset where it was for the
purpose of endeavouring to srfve human life, "We will prove to you that the heart of the
animal which was killed by strychnia poison is invariably full, and it stands to reason it
would be so ; if you kill an animal, and I hope, if you have a doubt about if, that eom'e
morning before the Court sits you will desire that a reasonable number of animals shall
be brought into one of the yards of this building, and that you see them die by strychnia,
and form an opinion for yourselves. •

Lord Cax?3ELL. — 'That cannot be.

Mr. Serjeant Shee, — J^oir 1 have discussed what may be said for this ^rpose to be
the theory of the matter, but I have not yet met the strong point whioh will be made for
the Crown on the evidence of Elizabeth Mills. I am, on all occasioBs, most reitictant to -
attawk a witaess exaaiined on his or her oath, and particularly if she be In a humble
condition. I am very reiviotant to impute p^ury to such a person, and I think a man
who has been so k»!g in the profession as I have been would, in most cases^ be at hU
wit's end when he rps^es :at once to an assuntption that a person whose itatemeul, after
a Qousiderable length of time, materiaUy varied in the idesoripti^w of symptoms which,
nu^dical witnesses have seeU) that therefore the witness has necessarily, 'deliberately per-
juxed herself. The fact is, jre. know perleetly "weU, if a considerable lapse of time takes
place between the time when the tot story, was tc^d and the telling of the second story,
and tlie intdligtnt pecsoas who are aoauo^Srfor.tJhe purpose probably oif aseertaintog the
truth, but with a stroipg nniirfd • canvietioiiL of the guilt of tli^e party charge^ thait such
persons will go and talk to witmesscei and- aak them, ■' Now you halve seen. so a^d: soi, wais '
there anything of this kind?" lAsing expfiessiona which tltey.know to hare been used in
a ease of poison of the «ame ikind-wihieh they iSuspeetia ithe. peoyliar case under (intesti-
gaAiou. It may be that she adopl^ the- taiiens suggestions that they. malae,,' and she
persuades herself she.jna^teU ilJni/^oiirti That .is either, wicked peijiu^* or it is a
deplorable weakness, of mind and of memory^i an^ili total absenoe of jtecsistence in a
strongly-formed opinion, whici) rendei^T a; person's enid^aee of the. leaat ipossihie real
value, but, at the same time, of the most fear&l and most miaehievoae effgctio the party
accused. Let me ptunt out to you what oecmts itocae ito he the dght o^nion to be formed
of the evidence of Elisabeth Mills.. I submit to groa.inthil cas6 of Ule and death, or In
any one case involving any qqestieaof realiii^portance ^o liberty or to property, that
young woman's evidence cannot and weald inot lie regarded ia the ordinary administration
of justice, when on material points she hae. stated tvK0> different- etories^ A jujry oan really
hardhr believe th^n, and in orimiaal cases the learned Judges aoe, without altogether
rejecting the evidence and withholding it fixun thejury^in the habit «f pointing out

202 TSUL OF WILLIAM TJlLMESL

to the jury ike diserepBiieieB betweeen the ststeaieiitS' given at difiefent timei,' and saying
that under all the oircnmstancMof Ihe ease it •wmvM not be sale to r^j on the testimoay
in the last instance, if it d^Eer from, and probably is more strong]^ aaverae to, the party
accused than the statements made when the impresuon was fvesh in the witnesses mind.
It cannot be said in this case that EHzabeth MiUs was not fdUy and fiuriy examined. I
sabmit to yoa, with gieat deference to the 'Attoraey^^^eoenil, that he really made- it fsbe
point, and I think it is imlbrtmiate for the Oewn that point wBtttadev in atttaddng the
eonmer, Mr. Waid.

Now, gentlemen, jmst place yoivseLves fmr a moment in the pesitioiKof Mr. .Coroner
Ward, and, to enable yon the better so to do, jnstivceileot whot^has paased in the eoarse
of this Tery trial. How many questicms have been put by my learned friends^ and I do
not like to say how many by myttlf, how many by us all have been pnt, on aeeonnt of
which it has beeii foand necessary for the opposing eonnsel lo-intetpose, and - to ask tiie
learned Jndges whether the question- is a proper one or not. The traih is^ our Tnles are
strict, but they are found most beneficial^ and tfa^ exclude firetnthe minds of the jury
that sort of loose and general iaibrifMiikion which is the mere resvk, particularly in
country towns, of pothouse talk and market gossip, insitead of being evidoiee <ii aeteal
fects, seen by the eyes and deposed to >on the oath of the witnesses.. Just look- at the
position of Mr. Coroner Wardi^ at the Talbot Arms, in a large* room just under the bed-
room in which poor^Cook died ; a crowd of exeited yillagers and people in the room, ail
full of suspicions incited by the inquiries instituted by the Prince of Wales Insonmee
Office and Inspectors FidkL and Simpson, and all impressed with the idea that whatever
the doctor that has come frem London, that whatever Dr. Alfred S^ayne Taylor says
must be true ; if he says it is poison, poison it is. The whole town is in a sort of uproar
of alarm and excitement. Jurymen (who, like you, have never been in the habit of
attending frequently the administration of justice under the control of the learned
Jtidges) think that any question that occurs to them is to be put. ** Did yon not hear so
and so ? Did not somebody tell you that somebody had said such and such thing?" I
mention that just to show ihe difference between the mode in which we proceed, and tbe
course adopted in other countries. There was a celebrated trial, which took place many
years ago, in which I remember I took a great interest, of the trial of the ministers of
King Charles the Tenth. Upon that occasion a witness was called to prove that be had
read all the panmhlets which had been published on the subject, and he came to state
what the result of those pamphlets was in his mind. It is true that was at a-revolutiooary
time, but it shows to what an extent the introduction of a loose system of questioning
would lead. I do not say that Dr. Taylor would have wished to put any questions whieh
would not be right questions to put, but it would be so fashioned by^the coroner as to
assume the- le^ and regular fond, though perhaps it was not the eocaet question or in
the exact wofds which were originally used. He was aeeomtpaniied. l^a gentlanan who
holds a hi^h reputation as a conveyancer, but we know how very little these geotleiaeB
.pay attention to the mode of examining witnessea. The pooc eMroBer,..who I under'
stand is a good Ixwyet and a most respec^le maa, —

The Attomey^&enercd, — You must not say that.

Mr. Serjeant Shee. — I am aware you have said the contrary. It comes to nothing
eiiJher way. We had him attacked ; and, not knowing hitn myself, perhaps I ought not
to speak as to his nespectability personally. But, yon know, it is odd if coroners are not
on the whole respectable. They are not appointed at random ; they are generally profes-
sional men, frequently lawyers — m fkct, generally lawyets ; and, ftom tny iiistructioBS, I
understood he was a person competent to conduct such an inqtiiry as this ; but Dr. Taylor
was asked "by the Attorney-General, "Why did jroti not say saai<d so to the corotier?"
and the answer was, he did not put questions which enabled him to fOrtu an opinion;
. but i think it arose rather frqm a want -of knowledge than intention. Of course it wotdA
not be likely that the coroner could know the questions "that would be important fbr Dr.
Taylor to nave put ; but when they were suggested, it does not appear that he did not
put them. He was quite right in not' putting questions merely to gratify an inquisitive
juryman, #hich yas not a' legal questitm or a proper question. While we do our best to
avoid ftillittg into errors Of that kind, We are tonstatrtly coming, and very deservedly so,
under the rebuke of ^e learned Judges, and toM toretn«nbbr the rule9 — *• you know better,
or you ought to know better, than to be putthig questfoiis not proper!;^ legal." Those are
rfot tbe words exactly, butthat is the effect of them: They complain that -fet may aecorart
for certain discrepancies in her evidence befthre the coroner; her evidence before you, I
say, mflJtesher evidetrce such that you cannot rely ujxm her testnacmy — ^^at ith mn^
slble your slKMdd. NoW) observe tna^ since ^e mrst time that she gave her evidence she
has bod the means Of knowing what the case of the Gpowu is. She has had "^he means of
knowing^ do mot iDea» to say. tlmHn been tatared by the Gfe^WB^-k would be a gross

SBVSafTH OUT, WAf 21, 1896. 203

injvtdte'to say 80 ; flod'l know if my learned ^imd tboaglit lint haii been done, he ^vtmld
iiotrhafQi otHeA het*-^-oT by anyof tb^gentieiBeB-wlio aet for the*Croim ; but sinee she
-vnm examined ali Itngidey, she has had the meeas of knowing, by interviews she has
had -mttk different peo^, that the case of the Crown is^ ^at Palmer, haying first pre-
pared the body of Gookiot deadly poison by the poison of antimony, afberwfffds de-
spatched bdm with Ihe! deadly poison of* stlychnia. She has learned that their case is^
that there w«s ■ am • a i da i iuis tratiQn »of something which' did* eventvally kill him, tiiat is,
aDtim(»iy, bat which had the efiect of producing retciixng, and nansea, and irritation of
the s^xanmSi, whiefa ^'aHllibnttd; ascKrdmg'to ^e- hypo&ens of tfie Oown, to liie deli-
hcntet perseiwnBg: intentidn: of the pristmec at the bartO'i^ednce him bit by bit^-^niakhig
hiih rejeet eTerydoog ofi&. his stomaohr so- that' when «nocr the ingeetioa of the poison
•oeeaseed he was eeitaittly dead ; that is tikie ease. In her first eridenee beifore the coroner
she was asked whether she had' taated the broth | and she^ said that ebe had tasted the
broth, and thonght it Tei^ good ; she- did not say a smgle wovd aboat any ill effeets that
broth had • j»oduaed npon iter^t^not a snogle woird; She has since learned it is part of the
ease foir the Crown» or of > those ont of whose hands the Crown has taken this prosecntion
~t>in facs^ the theory of Dr. Taylor^— that all this reaching and vomiting atos the result of
a ooBStant dosing with antinoMMDial poiBon, in order to pvepare him for an utter inability to
miisl2:tbe fifital doseof .stryehnia which it was intended to giv« him. Acedirdingly, when
she i» eaooained here, fitting her eTidenee to tiie case, and prohabiy after having been
asked many times wheliwr she had not bsen sick on some Sunday or anolher, she has
peisaaded. herself if fbehas not been persoaded*^! do not wish t6 nse the word suborned
-*«<tiiather sicknesa on seme Snnday afternoon took plaeeon the-Snnday ttfbemoon tint
brath was sent, and was caused by her having taken two spoonful of it. She did not
say so in the first instance before the coroner, but that "'she taated it^ and it was very
good." I ask yon. to consider for a moment whether it is not<to thelatt degree improbable
that a nmn like Palmer — a shrewd, intelligent^ clever man^^woold eiroose- himself to
snch a. dmnce of detection a» the sending of poisoned broth mado a* me Albion to ike
IVdbot Amns, at-< the imounait risk of its finding its way to tiie kitohen, idiere, sare as fiite,
the cook wonld taste- it. Can you conceive a ^ok not tasting lm)tii made by another ooc^,
and^s^it ever as jMirticBlarly good ? I submit to you it was snch a risk as no man in his
senses eooidby any possibility ran. A cook is, in the nature of the thing, a taster; ^ite
tastes ercrythiBg:; ahe does not know, of ooursei, if it be her own making, wiiether it is
good until* she tastes it; she gets the habit of tasting i and as aareasBriBMrsent'^
broUt to tiie Talbot Anas, and any part of it reached the kitchen, so smw, if it eontaasied
satimooy, would the eook bo ill. Is it credibie 9 I submit to yon,^ it is not credible ; and
'vvjien yon find she£d not say a word aboat it in the first instance, and that an ampie
oppcHTtunky was afforded :for her so to do in the way I have described, I submit you cannot
r^y upon her evidteaoe.here» as itidiffensr with her evidence before the ooroner. Again,
she said that on the Saturday Cook had coffee for breakfast about eight o^ok>ck. '* He «te
nothlog, but he vomitedidirectiy he^ had s^i^lowed it. Up to the time I had giinen him
the coffee I had not seen Pakner." , When • she gave that evidenee 49he weS'Sot aware it
was part of the theory of the Crown that the traces of antimony (which Dr. Taylor says
might have killed him) were to be made to fit into the theory of the strychnia poison —
that it was a gradual preparation, by vomiting, for strychnia. That chart of the country
over which she was to travel had not been laid before her. She did not then know what
at the time she came here she did know — that it was part of the case for the Crown-

The Attorney-General opened the case in that way distinctly, that that was the theory
for the Crown; **lJiat Palmer had ordered some coffee for Cook cm the Saturday moniing;
it was brought up by the chambermaid,. .Elizabeth Mills, and given to Cook by Palmer,
who'had an opportunity of tampering with it before giving it to Cook." That was the
statement which the Attorney-General was instructed to make. There is aU the difference
between h^er first statement, that up to the time she had given the ooffee to Cook she had.
not seen Palmer, and the statement that she ffave the coffee to Palmer, for Cook, and
that Palmer had an opportunity of tampering with it. ITie youpg woman would not go
so far as that, but she went to this extent : ^' Paln^r came over at 8 o'elock — ordered a
cup of coffee for Cook — I gave it. to Cook — I believe Palmer was in the bed-room — I pot
it into Mr. Cook's hands but I did not see, him drink it — X observed afterwards the coffee
had been vomited." The. statement thna made by her before you was not so strong as
that of the Attorney-General, but,, on the other hand, it was a great deal stron^r than
the statement she nmde before the Coroner, becaijse.accor^g. to her story then Palmor
had not an opportm^dty of deaHng with it — ^e " did. not see Palmer up to the time she
had ^▼en him the. conee/' Prom the statement which she made here you might suppose
that Palmer^ if he had diosen, might have got the coffee from Cook— but that is in the
last degnee improbaUe-Hind have don» what ho wanted to do with it; for i^e says.

204 THAL OP WitlUM PALMKIL

''* Pfthner came over at 8 o'doek and ordered a««ip of e&See, mtid'-^urt ^Hien'-ft ^WM ntde
fihe took the coffee up into the bed-foom Mid gkve it hutb Cook's Imds ^e4»e)^«d
Palmer was there), bat she did not see liSm drink it, aad aflenrards' flke- ebl»rv«d ^
coffee had been vomited." These two stat^meidB, Ike one be^»re tkfr dP i mu ' aad *tbe
other before yon, are esseatiallf different, aad the d iflfei e am IwfWeeii %h«nA aBn^tftia
this : that the hist one supports the tkeorf now ^et up <^4he paM of %ke Crewa; wfa^ the
first one is totally inconsistent with it. Om yon i^y e>n« wAnia w<Ik> hasidlerod'her
testimony to snch an extent ? Bat Ijiat is not all ; 1^ <nse ^r the f^owifift;- Hiae'ODdk
was reluctant to take the pills w^iieh 'were giveb'te^ hin« aUdihtt 4ie ^pNisMfld a'tcldcttmee '
which Palmer of his own kead o^mtMt' and that I^almerknew that<?b<yk-WM«agrf
with him, or at all erents distAeasedwilh him/'fer ^freni^^kft to take i%e 'fiW:- IWUbt-
first statement of EOzahetk Mills' beffi^re the Coroner she said Gdok ttAd^H wa^^tHe-piOir
that made him ill, and that fa€! had taken Ihe'pms aboat ladf-past lOi" tfiien'iAi^4c«itee
here she swore that Oook said ** thejpUh wM&k Pafh^ ^f&te Aim tt# ^M^-pxaH ItX'fiMd^'M^'
iU;" thereby, yon see, fixiiig the'^LCt 4hat>Paiiher 0ire him the piHs, and'fhting'^ tiittfc '
at which Palmer gave them to hlhi,'^e-hai4ng had an opportunity «f teamits^'ftrttt the
later the pills were givim the Mre fiivo^rable It would be^to '^e anspieicn mtX death
had been occainoned- by Ihis poviott. B^ftf^e the Coronet she did not isay that PtdioKS* was
in Cook's bedFoomi)ettreen 9'teiiid'l^'o'clodt OB-i^ Monday Bi|ht, bat "she df# wlieABke
was here. Yo>a w^l ^e thtit' nUikes hitta more about the bed»de of Cb6k,' hiaviiig moi^
opportunity of deafinr wiftli' the ^ifis. By thes6 variances ft*om her first statement she '
shows the animus wnicl^'now; fbf -donie reason or other, actuates her. Petkvps if h«8
be6n the result of Ae p^rStiasioil iSbat Palmer was the murderer of Mr. Cook, as Dr.
Alfred Swayiie Tftyl6ir tlwore he i«, aad of her horror of so great a crime; -timt gitwit
the jost c]3^Vitid)Ie edn^tra(Hioti ; still, I say, she is not to be reKed upon. ^But how verj*
easily 'persons in ttjat^owtlon bf life, not intending it probably in the first insta&ce, m^ke
a mistake, afnd hdw wtglt we tnow it to be the misfortune, or probably the p\lttisfament, of"
all felsehood, Vhen ouee toM it is next to impossible to retract it ! Once teU a lie and you '
caiinot, without great humfliation and loss of character, draw back ; once 'commit your-
self to fttlBeh^K>d and. you are false for ever, or dishonoured. When a young woman has
beeb induced to vary her statement in a m&terial particular, knowing she- is wanted fbr
an^impdrtant object, the pursuit of strongly suspected guilt witii the extrieme rigour of
thtf Ittw, and that scientific persons believed the prisoner to be gnilty and were anxious to
brit^his guilt home td him, she may have feared to incur their displeasure, and having
once told a falsehood lacked the moral courage to set herself rigitt. I have mentionea
the particulars in which her statements vary, but these are nothing to the important par-
ticulars to which I will now call your attention. I impeach her testimony on the ground
that-^e adopted here a manner and a gestieulation in describing 'thl^ symptokns under
wWeh' Cook laboured wTiich, if true, would have exhibited itself at the iiiquest, and
wottld have at onte attracted the attention of Dr. Taylor. The cdritortloA 'into which
£h«fpather hands, and her netk, and her mbnth, before you, could' nbt by any possibilltr
have escaped the attention of Dr. Taylor. If aiiy tiling like it took ^ace there it would
lia^fe' beeh observed by him, and questions would have been pnt to reduce, so to speak,
tho^ ^^tictflations into verbal expressions, that they might be re6oided in the deposi-
tiotes.'. Bttttl^iati^ notall. I am told, and ytm wiH have an.opp<3frtuiiity tof l^ariagit
fr^fii Mi*; NuAneley, I>r. l«theby, 1>. Robinson, and o*k€t ebiiMtft medical men, that
th§^ dfeScrlptfon of the sytaptoms "#hich' she de^Mbcd t?0' yeta is incbnsistent Irith any
kiiWfii'disefe^e-^liiatthey were grouped by her" in t manner go extraordinary as to be
•qiwfcief'Jn'coiisistent with strydhftia tetaixtt^ - ^ .

l>et'me ciill your attention to tilis J)att df' the etideneej 'You are a^are that in the
m^tftJife of Febntary (the Jiagt week 6f Febmaj^^^ and March,' a -very frightful case ot
sti^fehi^ occurred at IteediT.' It' was a case !fe which at)er80O,'haT'ing constant access to
theii^^de'of^he't>atienf, Wa^ s!ip^osed'to'hii,Ye ddministered ^repeated small doses of
«ti^ehriia 'so'is^riOt at dhce'Ho sfrik^ her dor#A, but gradtndly to destroy her ; and that
afler liitiiifff kfept he^^ ih a State of ifritdti<:ln fe^ si lengthened period, at last consummated
theriit>i*'and'kaied her. .T^at was thfe ca«^. ' Jt'appeai^d in all the newspapers. The
nuweVhtt attended the" jf>^fieht <ttd the medical 'g^titeinen spoke of symptoms which
sh^ exhibited frbm tHe^4th 6t 25& of IF'ebrttiaiy to the l^t of March, and they described
it^ this way:-^^fihehiid"**^nrlekiri^sf aiid " tWitfehings " in the legs, coming on without
any vicDfent pai^oxy^ms or ^piisni^, and ^as ilarined |lt the thought even of being touched
by anybody iti the intervals of tne sjyasins wiffch bcdurred from time to time. Now let
me call your att^ention tb the eVideniebefbre yoti of Efilzabeth Mills. She says, "He
said, */ cannot lie doten;* his btodv and neck were moving and jerking; he wonld
♦hrow himself up, jttmj)ing and jei'klng all over his body all the time; he asked me to
his hands; I noticed hfaa to * twitch '- while I was rubbing his hands." {TIte

fi&yiSTS D4r, lUr 21r 1666. 205

kmtii'JStfifmi tmi^p^rii^ ^HU midmm.) JSqwI intaitto to« that 80b« of thcM

fTpwiiiwiB, pirrioMtoriy Ibfe twUduniu we T«r^ xconarJuible; ani it siay well liave beea

tfait* tlu»ci00 eo«ais.lMiiar« Ih^ poUio and anrntiag iM>.littla 4«giea of attention, altkoagfa.

not to the ' nwa a»ti»t , a# thaw Bjngetoy caiWWipeww^R^wh^ had baen in the halnt of

goiag toaea harand^fianveiauig withhar m^ hvralieen askinn her <|«e8tions about thia

cue« oif whiahaba adaoittad aha had S^aard, " Pidijron ohaepve in Cook any soeh aym-

ptanB as tkm^r* hier amaitioa haing «aUad tO/ tbain.m aooh a vay aa to iaiduce her to

altar tito atatqaaiv^ paaria,)byinec4tfstba. inqiieat..< ITou aaaaot indeed, acooant» aa I sabmit

to joa» iaaiao w a w a wl^aW ata d i ffcn wa y IbwtiwaiL Umb tot «(«d^aaraad statemauts^ withont

ia^pQi|bgaoi«etli)ngafth*tJMai44 NW^is'itiinpnahahlethiatthMdid take place? Fron

th4<i]|if abiilaft ik^ CDalbal ijona tiU,ahai4aipa.hevat fha.aeana to.have bean a penoa of

T^jrenvaphahW mportanaey .$^ man^t to .I>aliy#,<a]id Mr, Stenrena yisited her six w

lersn tiaiea, ,.Wkj did ha.viaittliei;? Wfaat;foi>? .-Mr* SfaiFeas j» an(|Bestiottably— and

if under piKipcr auf*j«atrainl^ oo one ean hlaiae him for itr-^yary indignant at what he

fea^.toliave ima,ihe i^ T^.^^iPdXififis .iifitliMGofik': .He.js aft^.sa the same condition

of lij|e aaSUiaabath-MUls^ . Why. ahoi^ h#ibaiice4[ffpaito y^si^ JUer. six or. seven times, con-

T«y(i|g irith her in. a. private, room 7 Sh^ sayj^ **U» only «aff»e,to see whether I liked the

plica; ha flatted to inquire after Jny health^'' Gaa^im^ al8p».hM ^ttom^, saw her once, but

only saked har how she was^ mi they MiUcad tH^nX aikpr .things . She said she gave the

last anthaaftia'a^oonni of her evidence to a ow^ shed^d^Pi^ k^q^vr-rmwhom she had never

•eaa beilore; and^ whan< I foand out, a£terjnnch.tueatiio>fii\gf thaitvMrt Stereaa was with

hin, and asked .her.vhy she had not told me SQ« her anf^Pfer^^was., '* 3^cauaa you never

ssM jBie." .. Tha* raised a laugh, and aha^anisf^^the?, p&m^ .AU>. thia. looks like

having been tutored* I do not sagr that it was done with a, d^iln^ral^ intav^on of making

her lay .what was laiae, but it waa done with the deUbera^c ^nf^eii^on oJH trymg if they

ooold not atimnlate. her memoir to recollect anew version of the ^ts» ...They had a

fight to go thera and take her evidence, but that was all.. liffsi^.Q^. thatt MiTr Hatton»

the.ppUoe oflioerr had been there a few times; several otheif pei«o(i^,wJ|toiia.names were

sot mentioned had been there, but Mr. Stevens had bee^ there a.iiiMnber of times* . .1.

sohmit to you therefivre, on this part of the case, that youcaimpt rely^Qp j^hff$ aha hag .

been stating. Yon will remember also certain questions whick I put to hQr» god nrhich

were not answend quite aa they should have been. There is agnjat di^er^noe. batween

the, weight given to the evidence of a woman of good character and a "womjin of another.

loud; and it is light to ascertain what the mode of life of a witness is. X. do not veiy

nmch blame a peison who aees the drift of such questions far being on her guard ; but .

when. she told me that since she left the Talbot Arms she had beep stayii^ withfriands».<

and I asked her who the^ were, she told me» " Fiaends are friends i",. a|id waa very ra^

lactant to. tell ma anorthing about them. I put it to you that you cgnno^. witii,,any .

degree of satis^tion-^ rely anthet evidence of the young woman; and. you ^ill Jeai;n

that the confusiouandthayariety of the symptoms she has put together, taking them

partly from her depositionaand partly from this new version, have made.th<9 c^e, which .

she describeid i^ot onjiy m)t, >a .cas^ of tetonua» bu|t not of any known dise^^s^ , . • . . , . ^.,

Befora I leaya.thistpajirt.Oif..th^ evvjtoce, X wish to make on^.or two..observalio»a .i
oa minor features. in.. it,,, which' parh^pa mayi ivot be altogether uj^worthy.i)^.y<9uv air 'r
teotioA. I want.to.ahQw.yon.how various in minor .matters maybe the.testipi^pnyjojf, ,
persons .who do not metan.,to state whft.U.fsJse. .$he .stated i that Mr.. JE^ahpaer.'Wffa
sent for, and sa^d,pn..powii;ig ^nto.,the ro9(m^ " X do, wot tW^ikJ. ev^r ^ress^d f^p ^Hj.in.i ,
my ]Xf^.» J^|^ ^^^ 1^ tygs,iiugjgje§^d fh^weA,h9.ha,d j^y,er be^ tQ.bejl>.hut iv^ Tr^Ung ^
up for the Commencement of the paroxysms. '>jjoY, ,£lisabei^,>liUaf .oi^' h^, .^^ijossr,, .
examination, after. a«4efd.f»f M^MtWMQOjimsr>i^t^.>aaid,^^^ in.ft.plai4.dpftssij?g- '

gown, and she could not.reqomapt gi^ytlmi^.tM ^^' ^f^ WPew^c^i.^f »> piffJ's'^Wr* .i
about, his neck, or a^y; .AppftaranAQ< o^„h^ |);^vi^ig,r^iflfaineft.Q.T»t,p^, .be^,.^,, ft^iith^, .
other ha*d, there waa,a».ya«ng^>rowgp».i4iviWia,Bai;»j^$f^^ i^.^jtJ^at,sh^4^awi#e
that he came. dressed in.a,WMf, coa^, Th^ 9^t{ t^Mgn^bqu^. i^ ^i^d.tA^^ .fftpcy
after a time that what.tj(^y ^^a)fa. sai4,ft}iewf ^lv;^?,,9ri WW. otljieff, peqpl^ k^^ W<J/'«i.
the truth; the, real owgiiasl;imgg^.ilf,$hft mifl4s. q£,tb|8,jPfif]tpts gej;^, ^^^^,p^hapa ,
altogjfther .obUter;ated, aa4:th^y,,eftflf^«i;fti)4^.jli9 m |y,^j^ *^,atory..i«^ify„dA«efea^.fEom
the thing they originally saw^ -Ij wUl mwyn-^W th^t Mis^.i#i|lls.iTW,^;if^^^i#§d three
^es before the . coro^ier^ awd.^f -thcrR .w?V^l"lXtf^^-*^WW^"^»W^>?''^^^^^*^'V^^
he conducted himself the.CrftwWi<>ug^,j9p)^i^ Jiadj,hi|ft;h^ ,..An(i<m

an occasion of this sort.iUs rigM,jr.,.tIjfjiik .^{^ovJlct h^vPi^ii ^ppprtuiuty of

defending himself. They.cpul^ \m^ .wed Sw» ftad.,e;?;?UKwed aiQ4 ci-ossrcx^ned
him, just as if. he had been .an. ady^r^ ^i$ritn^^$«; but to disparage the .manner in
which his official duties, have beeff discharged by tlte evidence of^a person like EUzar
beth Mills, is a course wldch it seems to me ought npt to have been pursued. Now,

20e TBUI. OF WILLIAH PALXES.

OB ^t part ef Ihe cMe, I bsve tbii obserrmtioii tD make; tiie illaen of liie Svndcf
Bil^t appean to kavo botn a Tciy TCmarfcablo oeconrence. It cane oat in the coune
of tkc e yiiial i o Df as a Awt spoken to by himself, and it will be for yoa to judge,
after joa have heard the «YideDoe of the raedieal geflrtlemen, whether the periodicity of
the attacks docs aot militate against the tiieory of death by strychnia poison. The
illness of Cook takes plaee three nighti mnninff, exactly at the same time, or if nst
csaelly at the same time, ^psry nesriy. I find that is a symptom of very' frequent
oeeorrence, that abont the same hoar of the night, or of the week, or of the mondi, md
-veryoftenafier the patient baa got to bed, the thftni^oMiim. itisabontthe ssmehcniriB
this case of Mr. Cook's.

On this part of the caae, the qocation whether iha symplnms were waA as an con-
sistent with the theory of sdrycfania peison, and ineonsbtsnt with tite theory of desdi
from other and natntral canses, 1 have only now Anther to state what I intend to
prove. I will not go throngh in detail whst will be betlsr slated by Ae geattemeb
who will be called ; bat I shall call a nomber of mott r espectable physleiaas, snrs^ons, sad
general practitioners, having extensive experience in, oar Ifeirge cities, irim au support
the view I have to snbmit to yon, and wlnoh they hana saggested to me as the pro-
bable one— that these fits of Mr. Go<^ were not tatanns, hot violent onnvalsioBS, tiie
nsnlt of the weak habit of his body, which had been inenaaed by his mnde of lift,
by at least a saflicient amoant of disease to render violent ininswl pidsons in hn
opinion, and in the opinion of those he consolted, neotamry medieinea, which would
lesd to ulceration of the tonsils, difficulty in swallowing, and a stats of things whieh,
according to Dr. Savage, would have oontinned for a eonsideiable time, if he had not
had infiuence enoogh to stay it, by inducing Cook to abandon the eonree of ph^rsie
which he had been taking. Through the wh<^ conrae of that time-Ids constitatioa
would be affected. I will show you that soch fits have fteqanaOj oeenncd under
strong mental excitement, brought on by various canses, each as excess in eating sod
drinkmg, attacks of ^nt or dyspepsia, retching and vamidng, violent mental emotioDi
of any kiud, the patient being thrown into eonvnlsions of the vnlontary mnseles, a^
hibiting tetanic or tetaniform contortions, in the midst of whieh he dies asphynsted
or exhausted, his body after death exhibiting no traces whatever of the dismse. In
addition to that, I will call many gentlemen befbra yoa who will spank to their ex-
periments on animals, and who will be ready, if my Lord thinks it rights to show
you the experiments, that you may judge for yonxselves. They will ^ak also to
the mode of detecting in bodies the most putrescent the prssenoe of strychnia. Agree-
ing with Orfila, the highest authority on this branch of seienoe^ they say they esn find
it, and be sure of it— if it has been administered, and been the csnse of death—in
the dead body for months after life became extinot. Having now done with this ptrt
of the case, I will proceed to the last matter to which I jvoposeto callTonr sttention.

I propose now to discuss the question whether the oirecmiitsntial evidence agaimt
Palmer be soch as to be inexplicable on the snppoaitiou of bin innooenee, and if I show
jou on the broad and salient features of the evidence that it 48 not (you will ni9t expeet
m^ to go into the more minute details), and I hawe soooead^ in satisfying you on any
considerable portion of the points to whieh I hsfve directed ^onr attention, and if tbe
evidence comes up to what I have been instmated to sayit wilft, yon will be too happy,
recollecting that you are the country in the language 4>f the law^^that the oonntiy out
of doors, in a case of crime, of life and dea^ is uniniDrmed, without the opportunity^ of
hearing the witnesses examined or cross-examined on their oathsK-yoa are to decidt
between the Crown and the Queen's subject*^

Lord Cahpbbli^ — ^In the language of thelnw it is, '.' wMdi eoantry yon are.*'

Mr. Serjeant Shee, — Just so, my Ix>rd. The prisoner pnta: himself upon title conotrf}
^ which eoantry you are," and for it re^Kmsible befoitt 'tibewoiid^ £}very word of thu
evidence will be carried to all the ends and coroere tof the isa l ii , aad it will remain to he
teen whether this great country of England, in » paioxyam or cohnvlsion of prejsdioc,
treated by the rashness of one scientific man who had no knowledge of his own ahovt
the matter, has made ap its mind to sacrifice the life of n feUow*creatare under circnni-
tftances which would expose any person ;who .has eiver been pieient nt deathbed convnl'
tions liable to the same charge.

I say the circnmstantial evidence in- this case i» not tuck as to Justify you in coming
to a conclusion of the guilt of the prisoner. I will endevsour in this nart of tiie discos
sion to address myself to those portions of the case which seem at the ilrst tdush of theOf
and on judicial consideration of them, to require notice. I will not avoid anything thst
is difficult or that may seem to you difficult, so that when I sit down you wiU see thst I
have discussed this great argument fully and feirly in every branch of it, and ask yo«ff^
selves what ground is Kh^e fer nny verdiet but a verdict of /*<lfot Gnil^"? I ^

SEVENTH DAT, Mat 21, 1856. 26^r

aYoM nothing, and pioeeed at once to one of the most salieiit points. I will pum OT«r,
after an intimation that was nade from the Bench, the point about pnslmig- the man at
the inqaest, or the accident of a slit in the covering of the jar, which, sharp instrameBts
}i&ng used by the operators, may easily have ocenned, or the pntdng it in a InrAer
oonier of the room, from which there was no possibility of its being vemored. I do not
believe that any such ^rcnms)ances as these would indaee yon to come to a oodcIoooq
against the prisoner.

Lord Camss«u.^^-No memhev of the Goort, I think, has intimated any opinion as
to the other portions of the case ; merely as to the pushing.

Mr, SerfeaiU iSftcf^-^-Idonot wish to snggest anything which is not strictly correol;
and perhaps I ought not to nse what was intimated from the Bench in any way, but
lather sttbmit, where everybody perfectly well knew Palmer, any little apparent sbove^
80 to q>eak, daiiag the eoa?se of the postmortem, is not to be taken as an evidence of
guilt It was in leaning over, if at all, to observe an examination of considerable interest
to all persons preMot, and I cannot conceive that anything of this kind can be takeii
into oonsideivtion. No sexions complaint was made at the time. Mr. Devonshire said
nothing was lost by it. He said also the jar was removed to a comer of the room. It
was not removed oat of ag^t. It was in the broad daylight. It was imposable it could
be tak^i away without observatiott. It would be absurd &at Palmer should be suspected
of havmg done so with an improper object. This we know, that he was very reluctant
to have the jar removed out of 'Uie possession of those on whom he could rely — ^that w
yerj tmeu There were some persons who did not want to pay him 13,0002. There wer»
8ome persona who had been doin^ aU they cooM to nndermme his character for a very
GOQsiderahle time, impating to him the most wicked conduct respec^g a near relation,
which none of his own relations ever joined in, knowing that there were many persona
at Bugeley much prejudiced against him, and it was in his judgment of the last im-
portance tnat anything which 'Could be brought against him (and it was clear that this
post-mortem, from the conduct of Stevens, was intended to found a charge again^
him) should be kept in unsuspected custody, and that nobody should have an opportunity
of tanq^ering with it and its contents. When told that Dr. Harland is coming to mak^
the pQst-mortem» he says, " I am glad of that, for there is no knowing who might hav^
done it; and it is a satisfaction tlwt you, whom I do know, are coming to superintend
it." I say that was the conduct of a respectable man, who knows that his conduct would
bear investigation if it were properly conducted. But we know also that in a town like
Kugeley there were a great many serious people, who could not approve of his habits of
life, to whom his running about to races would not much recommend him, and who
he has reason to know woiud not very much regret any injury which might happen to hijQ.

Is there any other part of his conduct connected with the post-mortem wmch requires
explanation ? When the jar was going to be sent to town, he objects to its going )p
Frere's. He had some reason for that. He had an assistant in his service who had beeli
in the service of Frere. We know the jealousies that exist in country towns bet^ee^
professional men. We will not do Mr, FVere the injustice to suppose he would do $<^
great a wrong to Plalmer as might result from tampering with the contents of the jar j
hut still it was right to be cautious, and Palmer told Dr. Harland, " I want you to take
it with you to Stafford, and not let it go to Frere's house/* In these minor incidental
matters his conduct appears to me perfectly consistent with innocence. Let me call
3[our attention to Ais moone i3ii|x>rtant matter, on which my learned friend in his instriicT
tions was told to rely : and accordingly he did, in tiie discharge of his duty, rely i^pon
it. I will call your attetttion- to wbat'<has been stated by Myatt, the postboy. His
evidence was pressed into the^ase; it- could not well be excluded from it as an eviaeno^
of guilt. Now, what did it 'amount to? Befbre I have done, under the general head pf
Palmer's conduct, I will c&il your attention to what passed between him and Stevens,
Tou wUl find the conduct and. deportment of the latter w^ere such as would make som^
men almost kick him ; it was so very pn6vokiftg, supposing Palmer was innocent. He di^
sembled with him — pretendeid to take his advice— cross-questioned him — chanced his tone
npon him — now speaking to him mildly, now in a voi<i^of menace — ^threatened him with 9k
post-mortem examination — and evidently did the whole thing hostilely to him, as if he
thought something wrong had taken- place, and it was his duty not only to protect the
property, but to see any person who had been guilty of foul play towards Cook brought
to con£gn pnnishment. Stevens, after poring over the remains of the dead man at the
post-mortem examination, was ready to leave Bugeley, and a fly was ordered for hinok
and his companion Mr. Boycott, in which they were to proceed with the jar to Staffordi,
and thence by rail to London. Now, if there were anybody base enough, either in
support of a meory, in support of a reputation— God forbid that I should suggest that toj
the prejudice of Dr. Taylor I — if there were anybody capable of so great a wickedness

o 2

208 TRIAL OF WILLIAM PALMER

«s tamperiiig with the jai;» it might es^j be done ; and he was anxious to hisLve it^ept

by Dr. Harland au4 not conunitted to the custody of Stevens. His conduct to Palmer

had been vexatious and annoying in ihe last de^ee ^ the ^j was being got ready ato

Palmer, we may suppose, had dined ; and meeting the postboy Hyatt, he aslted hliiL

according to Myatt, whether he was going to drive Hr. Stevens to Stafibrd. ''I tola

him," said Myat^ ** I wa^ H^ asked v^q it X would u^iiset them?'* Now the word

** them ** was first used in this court V> designate the jars. There was only one jar at

that time, so it could pot be meant to f^ply to^ t^ jfursi if used i^t all, which I tbiiik

very doubtful for the reason I tell yof^— ^^ l^t ^ a bad sense — it musit have bees

applied to Mr. Stevens and his compani(m. . And now just see ir the facts in, this case

which are undoubted do not give a reasonable cojlonr to that, . PaWer (though I will show

you his conduct to Stevens was exemplary. in every; respect, l^y putting the dialogue

between them before ^ou without malung any eoniment on it) must have felt outraged

beyond all expression if-^koowing himsejf to be innocent,^ that he had acted as a friend

and brother to Cook, aJkd^^ had called hia' relations about him when he was ill—he foand

himself suspected of stealii\g a trumpery betting-book, which he knew was of no use to

aay one, and charged oi playing falsely and foully with the life of Cook. He had great

cause to be vexed and in;itatea with Stevens, and that he was so is plain from what he

aaid to Dr. Harland : ** There was, a queer pld fellow," he said, " wno has been do^ra

making inquiries, who seemed to be suspicious of my having stolen the bettin^-boolL

which everybody knows can be of no earthly use to anybody." It shows that hisJQJi^

was impressed with the idea that he was wronged. He may be supposed, communing

with himself, to aay^ " He has ill-treated me ; he has encouraged suspicious jwhich have

been excited against me already, and which, if he persists in his course of bnnglilg

ja«other chsurge against mo in this matter, will probably render it impossible to get the

money from the Invurance Company in time to rescue me from a position which maJF

involve m min myself and ^me members of my family." That was evidently^ tl^

tfmded^cy of. wh^it Stevens was about. He meets this postboy and asks him if he is l(v

be.i^eadT to drive tb© fly to Stafford ; the boy says, " Yes, I am." He said, " if I wpyli

Bpset them, there was a lO/.-note for me." He has been asked, " Had anything beea

0dd about the jars ?" I submit to you the true construction of the story.'if it occurred

at ally is, that being under a feeling of irritation against Stevens, and using stro;ag

.expressiims with regard to Stevens, hearing he was going to Stafford, he said, "1

.should not mind givipg 10/. to upset him." He had been vexed at his conduct, and

«lmtated by the. peipetual suspicions and inquisitiveness which he had displayed, even

^iHiien he went up with him like a friend to show him the corpse, uncovering .it do vn t<>

.^^ thighs^ Some previous suspicion must have existed in Stevens's mind ; but. Palmer

,]l^no suspicion of this thought that he was guilty of so foul a crime as that which was

/Impute to. him. If that evidence be throughout true, it is pnly true iix the milder aad

jinaoieeut, sense, and.! have this reason for saying sOp 'This jiiaii was ij^ the service of

ijyw.laixttord of the Talbot Arms, and was always about the y^d.; he was driving to anA

ri tb4. TalJ»t. Arsos ervery day of ^ his life -, he lu^us't have ^been there on the. day o'
fi9st^^Qrtein examination; hemust hayebee.^a p<^n£tapt.^cdfupanioti of the stable-
ubc^a and labourers about the yard;.aad his obseryation must have been drawn to a
t/llU9g'80 nitTikxag and i:emarkable as a post'^mdrteni e;Kaininatidn o^i account of asuspicioa
£titt»m:^V4, He was not called ,be$?re l^e , coirqnfer -^ 3^4.. nobodyMew, at the time the
otftfaesit if!W held, that, he had ever said apyihifla lyhich C9tu^^ be ^rly taken in a sense
^<wliij:^W4n|ld}msife iteviide»ce of a guilty j^^infll ^,paluie^r, ...feut if he had said that
^MUnw^aH !**'l .shoidd, pot mind.ffvii;ig.a.ip^i-j?io(;^, t'o h^ve, hi^ upset; it is a huio-
oAnggiogACOBttQero*" a«l,i^ tbat.m^ner, and, wift.yift fi^eti^g. I haye stated, it would not
have excified any obserya^on or,suspuQioi^,|S^d.^9 .ppe .^oi^ .ha^v^je summoned Myatt to
.* - '■-- ' .-...,.. ., !» .t..s it^' -ti ' ^ to be supposed

would suppose

of the tissues

' iCX*afiBliii^g<tWto!jd>e^iyi8 cQuid? ^"^^^ap^ ,

i w- N-estt JifiiimM <im ymrMl^nti^nM <^^^Jtecje jtrf jCHarles^ewton ; he is a person ^mo

, i««.»wittab^»e*y#i|^ft^iiefS«Wi JftW^y atjJj^^pitjS surgery at 9 o'clock on the Monday

arigb*^dnd.fchatlPftlm9E ^skf4ifcr.^hre%gra}p/^jOfj^trychm^^ weighed it, and gave

it to JUm ilk a.pi^ije of paper j; that.JfiiitlvF^pr^i part of/w)iat ne swore before you and my

. LiOirds;. Nog«^.l^hould(tell yoi^boT«,thjp ^j^e hw bpen conducted. As soon as my learned

friend the AttOPbeyrQenej:aT»j.'ftft <?PftR.6£lilt9?]i}iei.Cro,yn, was made acquainted with the

illness of mV learned friepd;. Mr, Serjft^^^i MtMWJi ,J?itft his inability to conduct the

defence (and thirt I was tp. wpply. bis pljM?e), fre Pf^^ired that every scrap of evidence

against the prisoner ^oiald be fo)rward^ to me* ai^4 ^0 vxj learned friends near me ; and

wrdingly, as soon as he received this evidence of Newton, he forwarded it to me, and

SEVENTH PAT, Mat 21, 1856. 209

J received it <m the daj tins court met I bdieTe it iras sent to me late on the preriomi

iught^ but I did not see it nnt3 the morning ^on wfefe sWorn* so^ftt this witness Newton

<lid not bring this matter ^at was in his Imowledge of the fatt of the pnrchase by Palmer

at Mr. Salt's surgery at 9 o'clock on the Monday night of three gndns of stiycmnia— he

4id not bring that to the knowledge of the Crown nntil the night before this trial com*

vienced. Now he had been examined at the inqaest, and he 'did not teU before the

coroner the rest of '&e stoty which h^ told when he was examined here. (7^ Uamed

Serjeant read the examiMtm of CHarfes -^Inr/on.^ He did not tell that to the coroner. AU

be told the coronet* was, tliaf he iras present ^hen Palmer bought some strychnia of

Itoberts on the Tp^bday night in the shop ^ Mr. Hawking * he did not speak to the purchase

of the strychnia on the Monday night; lie knew that he was called to corroborate a state*

Bient which Roberts had made as to th^ ptet^c^ df Palmeir at the shop, and the par-

chasing of the stiychma On the TSiesday, yet h^ neVier said one word at that time either

ef the fact of Palmer &i^g bonghi strychnia of Uitn on the Monday night or of hia

Jaaving asked him what appearances, if a dog' were kHIed by strychnine, wonld be

exhibited on its post-mortem examination. A niati Vho^ so conducts himself is utterly

Tinworthy of credit. There is one honest, laudable motive in ' a cour^: of justice, and that

is to assist in the administration of the ciiminal law of <be land. If any man had the

least hesitation when in court, or to come into court and take t!ie oath to depose to what

"he knew were the facts, we should not be safe against cifihe ifor a mo«nent. But you

^fannot Justify the fact of swearing away another man's Kfe, except under a sense of duty,

and for that object ; and if a man, knowing that he is to be ^rwom touching 80 grave a

subject as that of murder, the first time he takes the oa^ bmlts a considerable portion of

Vfaat he knows, and three weeks afterwards tells another portion/,' and'at a furthet interval

loonies forward and tells more — enough, in his opinion, to drive the guilt home to the

man who is accused — ^the witness, I say, who conducts himself i?n that manner ought not

tb t>e believed. The prisoner who is convicted upon the evidence of feuch a man as that is

Sacrificed by a jury. But there are other circumstances in that statelnent which render

it In the last degree improbable. That Palmer should, once ih a we^k^ purchase

Strychnia in the to^n of feugeley, is not to be wondered at. Btrychbia is feoM for Many

purposes, to kill dogs and vermin, and Palmer, as you may recollect, had olten oecai^on to

complain of the dogs from the slipping of the fofds and the galloping of the mares. In

the course of the evidence in this case it has been mentioned ^at stiydhnia was purchased

by Palmer twice within the week, when tiie first time he had bought t^uite enongh, and

more, for the purpose imputed to him. But that a person should ^o and buy strychnia

twice in a week in a small country town, having bought enough for all purposed the flrtt

time — that he should go and buy more the next day at the shop of a rival tradesman,

with whom he was on bad terms — is to the last degree improbable. Common sentfe

revolts at it ; nobody can or ought to be believed who makes any such statements; Agaiil^,

observe he had been to London on the Monday. In London there is no'difflbutty ibr a

medical man to get anything of the sort which he may require. ' H^ has only tb write It

down in the technical way, s6 as to give evidence of a medical education, and ft is givoli

to liim at once, without a Word. He had been to London ; and agaiii^, if he could' "not g^t

it there, he could ^et it at Staffbrd. Why should he get it at Rugetey ?• that irfthe lilt

place that he wculd have gone to for it. It seeins to me that h » eqn&llY impowible lie

ever could have bought it fbr $uc^ t piurpose as the purpose attributed to him, and that he

wonld have been, if really tttiiity, so unwary as to auow the paper in Which the stryifthtda

had been not to be found ^th the ftiSX quamiQrhe ht^d purchased in it ; he would not harte

been such a fool as not to tiikti cafe that the paper in which it wis wrapped was fUll -of

strychnia before his house was s^ai'ched, so as to make strre that it shoald be found 'thbt

nothing should appear to have been used out t>f it, and that th6 exact quantity was int&e

paper. I submit, therefore, it cabnot be believed— it is not chjdibie. ' '

I am now in a condition to satisfy |jron that Paliteer Vas undoubtedly ih toWn^ and tliat
he could not have been there at nliieo'dd^k ; that' he li^as in London at' a quArter pttt
three o'clock, and that he could ti6t have been fh^re by nine o^cloCk^^4he hoai*B at Wfai^h
the trains start rendered It ittkpbssittle. The thhig'ii^' ftd^— didwnri^ht fhlst. It is im-
possible to have got to Bugeley before a quarter oast ten, and we will account ^r what
he did in a way that will entirely satisfy )^<^; H<i attended th^ posMnortem examination,
and is it credible that a skilfhl medical mafa, who had studied at thci 'Loitfdbn hoftpitals,
would have gone to that dolt Newton io ask him as to what wonld be the eflecCs of
strychnia on a dog's stomach ? Is it credible tliM h^ should go to that Btupid '9oti of fellow,
who gave his evidence in that dogged, mulisTi, sullen manner, whidi ofteti^ is indicative
of something else besides the want of understanding, and that he wonld have gone and
asked a chap like that, "What are the effects of strychnia?" and then, when he had
been told, he would snap his fingers and say, <* All right." It cannot be-^it is impossible.

MO TRUIf OF WII,UA|1 PAUHER.

Ko one ironld bdiere it; and I nboiit to joa oonfideoUy tlttt vttlefll tibere It andii
ttroa^op evideiice than that, it is eridence od which 70a cflAnot rely for a moment To
abov the annum of thia Newton against Falmer, I will remind jou of what he stated.
Palmer said " tihat joa will find that he has tftken a gn^ deal of mercvj ; you will Sod
tiiis 'lUlow' died from a diseased throat/' When he is questioned aboat it mildly and
quietly by my friend Mr. Gror^ as to what was the exact term Used, he answer^ *' I do
Bfot know whether he said poor or rich;" just as if it conld be a question of that kiod.
What we wanted to Imow was, whether he had spoken of the poor dead man in a pitying
way, or whedier be had spoken of him as a disreputable person, unworthy of aO coa-
nderation. As to tfiat part of the case I will say no more, and I wUt 'prooeed to other
matters, taking you baeL agun to what occurred at Shrewsbury.

The case for the Crown is, dmt as early as the 14th of November, at Shrewsbury, the
fchcme — the plot-^ poisoning commenc^. That is the suppositiou of those from whom
the case has been taken by the Crown. Now, it is suggested that on the night of Wednes-
day, the 14th, Palmer dosed this man. Cook, with something that he put into his brandy,
afiid the witness Fisher told us that Cook told him so* If you remember the early part
of my address to you, t read a few words at the end of a letter fram Cook to Fisher, in
which, alter tellinf him it was of vast importance to him, as well as to F^dmer, that 500/.
should be paid to Mr. Pratt, he adds in postscript " I am better." These words must haTe
referred to his illness at Shrewsbury. The letter relates to another matter, which is of
fi;rest importance to Inm and to Palmer, and he does not seem to treat it aS one haviag in
Bis own miud a belief that Palmer had drugged him with poison for the purpose of de-
s^oyintf his health at Shrewsbuty. Then again, on the evidence, what does Pabner say
himself about what occurred at Sluvwsbury P He says, when it is mentioned, " Cook says
I have put somethiiig in his glass ; I do not play such tricks with people :" taking^ it as
if it had been nerer understood otherwise than as a loose expression of a man, perhaps not
actually dnink>-the evidence dq^ not go to that extent — ^th<mgh I think you will be of
opinion he was very nearlv approaching to that condition. Palmer did not gsi to Shrews-
bury on the Wednesdariifl after the dinner-hour at the Raven, and I do not think we have
any distinct evidence how Cook passed that day at the Raven, fiat I shall be in a conr
ditlon to prove that he went to the Unicom, where^ Saunders was; that he came there
pretty flush ; that they heard of the vomiting and the sickness which Mrs. Brooks told ns
abont. He was at the Unicom with a lady and Saunders. Who the lady was I do not
know, nor does it matter. There he drank for the benefit of mine host of the Unicom as
eaEecrable brandy as it would be possible to get. Seven or eight glasses of brandy snd
water did that young man ^* knock down " during the evening. The result was, no
docAt, that hia infianied syphilitic throat was in a dreadful state of actual ulceration and
soreness. 1 could not help being a little amused by a version which I read some time ago
of thu portion of the Shrewsbury plot I will read it to you : — " After indulging freely
ih Ihe foreign wines of an Engll^ country town, 150 miles from London, the owner of
Fdlestax' took to brandy and water to restore his British solidity. Tossing off his glass^
he eomplahied that there was something in it, for it burned his throat. Perhaps those
who have drunk strong brandy and water with similar haste may have experienced the
saiHe sensation; perhaps also, like Mr. Cook, they may have vomited afterwards. Hf
bolVed'his brandy and water down at Palmer's challenge, and bolted, it up again when it
eneovtnterefl the cold champagne. That night he was very drunk, and very sick and very
ill.' His dinner he east up into a basin '; his ixioney he deposited with his friend Mr*
Ishma^l Fisher, a soorting wine-merchant, of Shoe-lane, Holborn. To this Mr. Ishmw*
Fisluer the owner of Polestar gave 7001. to keep till next morning, expressing his beU«*^
at fU^ same time, that Palmer had dosed him for the sake pf the money, if such bad
be^ Palmer's intentiou, would he have left Cook at sbch a moment ? He neither followed
hiih'from tHe room when his stomach rebelled, nor did he gO near him all that niga^
TMs neglect shbwed, indeed, how hollow was his friei^dship» but it proves his innocence f
guilt 'Jrould have been much more oftcious. Next morning Copk looked very ill, as »pJ
ar^^pt to ^ after excessive vinous vomiting ; but his drunken suspicions of Palmer bed
evaporated' irith the fumes of ibei brandy, and they were again firiends and brother
sportsmen/* ' ., .... .

I believe that in the tme version of the mattetf , and that Cook believed it to w 8^
He breakfasted with Palmer the nextmjoi'ningj'he was good friends iffith him the who**
of the day, and went wit^.him to Rugeley, and^ there remained on Palmer's invitatw®*
In consequence of the letter which Ptutt Wro^e on the 13th, and which Palmer got on
the 14th, in whl<Jh.they both' had aar interest, Cook wrote to Pratt to say that sofflC*
body would call on him with 200?., and he wrote t^ Fisher to tell, Fisher to do ^*^
Did anybody at that time believe that ^here was any intention to drug and V^
this man ? l>oes not the explanation that M^rs. ^ookes gave, which I mu')^ ^^ ^

SK t mHH DAT, Mat 21» 1856. 211

yrfRfwttnriy ere^Crirfe to licr, die readiiien with vkidb jriM staled to m« tkat. W

kosband did not flpptove of her attcndiiiff races, that it was dka g i ee sMe to lum ; and tkft
dq^nity, if I may say so, irith which she auweied the question pia to her hj my hainwA
Mend — *' Are yon intimate with Palmer V by this other qacstran* ^* What da yo« man
hy intimate with him ? I am IxieadW," seemed to me to entute her to all dae respceC
And when she, being called ibr the Crown, tells you— ^* That ni^t I heard in sa^reiaL
directioiis of a great nnmber of people who were pomd and iromited ; there was a
general aflSection of the kind amongst strangers TisitlogSrewshary on that oeoasioa "*-*
I submit to yon it was to the last d^ree improbable that anything of that hind occarrad*
Aboat the tombler which she saw in Palmer's hand I cannot suggest any reason beosuaa
it is not in my instmctions, but it might probably be accounird ibr in tiiia way : When he
came back from Engdey and found all the people indisposed, he would naturally look aS
the water to see if there was anything to account for its nnwholesomenfitt. Mrs. Brookea
sud, and that is the point to which 1 wish to call your attention^ that he was in a paasaga
under a chandelier; that the waiter pointed to him when he showed her up stairs ; that
he spoke to her while holding up the glass to the light, and said, " Wait a minute, and I
will come to you." Nothing can be more natural than that ^ and I submis to you it is
impossible to say that there is anything to justify a suspicion of poison im it With
regard to the money he gaye to Fisher, I can suggest uo other reason than that, joai
before being sick, he gave his money to Fisher, feeling that it was coning upon hiuit and
that his stomach was revolting at the liberties he had taken with it. He had the good
sense to place his money, when he was still very sick, in tha hsads of Fi&her> and ha
afterwards went to bed. It may have been that he had been guilty of expsss in eating
and drinking, and it was necessary to send for the doctor, who, when he came, wished to
send him nn einetic. The young man knew so well what to do that he said, " Oh I I oaa
make myself sick without an emetic ; I will put my tooth-brush down my throat; I caa
be sick without your emetic/' He took a pill when it was reconuueuded to him and a
black draught, and the moment he laid his head on his pillow ha was perfectly free fi*oaa
any alarm, and he got up the next morning perfecdy well. Gentlemen, that is reaUy too
hidicroos to be worthy of a moment's cousideration. Now let us go to cartaiu other
matters, and more particularly to the conduct <}f the prisoner himself. I would jnst
mention that there was a person there of the name of Myatt in the room at the time they
say the brandy-and-water was drngged. Why was he not called ?, The others came ia
just before going to bed, but Myatt had been there the whole evening, and was not a
mere accidental visitor in the room. You will hear his version so ^ as it is neoessa^*
They have now got back to Rugeley, and then the history of the slow poisoning coutinuas*^
Cook and Palmer go back together, and probably they talk all the way about Pratt ajsd
their difficulties, and the way of getting out of them, and of the small wayithat the.
winnings of Shrewsbury will go to effect the object. They both see ruin staring, them, im ,
the face unleBs the Prince of Wales Offiee can be forced to pa)r the money doe upon tha
poficy of insuiance, and they can remain free from all suspicion of iosoivency oc mis-* .
conduct in the mean time. When they get to Sugeley, by sending up the. 20Ul to. Pratt*
they provide for the temporary difilculty. They are on friendly terms,., Palia^. Bp^ng . •*
use of. Cook's things, and probably both attaitiing their own objects, as it. would SrpllSW< <>
that Palmer said mrectly Cook died that he had some interest in bills which warn oiUn
standing ; and that might well have been, considering they were engaged in raciog trsfis- • 1 1
actions; that they wec^ joint owners of one horse; that they had the sama traiMPr» ,i
betted for each bther at races, and tluit they were confederates aadiHends QU tba tanf». {
in that sort i^ relation to each othei: which gave them, a joint intarest in th(9 saws >i*
▼«ntures. Cook sat at the table of Palmer on. the IQth, and wrote up that«iMgiht> tOi ..<
Pratt. Cook goes to bed late on that evenii^ well enpngh, not so dxvajk as jM» pri9^a$i •
his asking the chambermaid to give him a longer candle, m order .that .hcrpnigbt read ia l
bed. He seems to have had. a little champagne, not so much. as to have jn^ih him
drunk, yet perhaps too much for a stomach weakened- by ika e&cesi^if it was .«|a9as«|, at , ,
Shrewsbury, or by the vomiting which- ^vras occaslonsd 1^ the illness ^Ifer^iApdtb^ hpi
^Brater which he had taken. He gets up the next morning poorly ; he eats notbi^^ that .
day j ails eao^ for Mr. Bsmfwd to be called iii^lvr PalmeCt andPahner jis.wnremitiizig
in his attention to him on that day and Uie Sunday udlowing., . i > .

Now it is siud that that very attentiveness is evidence ox the prisoner'a guilt. Wha^
as my firiend here (Mr. Grove) says, what is a man* to do? Heie isayoHUg fellow's
liealth in very considerable danger. Cook, having a joint interest in^ racing trsnsaetions
with Palmer, thinks it convenient to stop at Bugeley, where he.has uo firlend but Palmoe.
They are hot flush of mo^iey, and Palmer has a house and am establishment on a modtvata
aoale immediately opposite the tnu in. which .Cook is staying. He is enabled to send
nteh things over as can be got in a private house, not at hotel prices, but at a very trifling

212 TS&Ah. OF 'WILUAX PALtfES.

ezpenie. linag tautAj op^oabe to .fhe how» of Riliiier* Cook would here ita^td/in
Pumer^s house all day, bo doobi, if he had beca well eaoo^* He was oB a vial to
Palmer, aad he knew nobody thece bmx Palmer* He was afling; and aa it is tctj duUlor
a man who has no inteUectnal poianits-to be alone all day wbai oot of health, PaliDer
^oes over and talka to hinu and attends to hia, and gels hiiiL whateonlbrts he onl That
IS what a man wonld do to a friend; it is piecisely what a man would do. If be bad not
done it, but merely attended to him; at nignt when he waa taken ill on the Monday night,
without visiting bun during the day, it might bawe .bec» ^d thaft he wte negketing him,
and only attended to him when he wanted to give him anotbet dose >af poison. That is
the way the Crown woold have put it thent He is labofioaaly attentive to him aader
dnaunstanoes which can well be aoconnted lbs by thoTeason thnt he had aotnaily,if not a
sineeie friendship iivliim, at leasl a. IHitndJhflnnd of lik^

him on betting and radng transactions, and could supply him with several things from
his honae at Uttle or no eypease^ If Cook had been well he would probaUy have had his
meals at Pahner's home. He waa ill, and Palmer sends Or^ Bantford to him. He ssir
bim at 8 o'clock on Sunday momiag and agun at -6 or 7 o'cloek. CooJk told him his
bowels bad been moved twice. or thrice. That is what he told to Dr. Bamford^ it may
have been known to Palmer that it was ofteaer^ and that the jtruth waa he was sligMly
auffering under somesymptemstof diarrhqsa, as he afierwarda stated in the letter to Jones.
It was Cook himfielf who told Jh* Bamford about his bowels having been aaoved ; aod^on
the same day PalmM' wrote a letter to Jonesi intending to bring Jones there, he being
about to go to London, and stated, *' Cook had been suffering from diarrhcea." It vas
at Shrewibary, where everybody else had diarriuBa: he took the mil and black dmaght,
and their effects eontionedt probably, to some extent when he waa at Kugeley. It is aboard
to pretend that the soiggestioo of diarrhtta could have any sinister object, aa Jones most
have ascertained the tnuh as soon as he arrived at Bogeley.

I now beg to call your attention to the next important fact in this oase. It seems to
me to be, though I touch ,upon it briefly here, one of the very last importance, and sue
which ought to decide it in the prisoner's £ivour. The supposition of the Crown is, tkat
Palmer intended to doae Cook with antimony to keep hb stomach in a perpetual state of
Tomitiog^ in order the more easily to despatch him by strychnia ; that be began the plot
on the. Wednesday at Shrewsbury and continued it at Rugeley, and that during the
Sunday Cook waa under the influence of that treatment : Sunday waa the day Palmer
atteiQ^tedf aa was said, to force the broth upon him. Now, being bent, aa it is supposed,
vpoii destroying Cook, there is one man in the world who would be the very last witness
be would a^eot aa a witness of his proceedings. He was a medical man, in the prime of
life, intimately acquainted with Cook, living in the same house with him, much attached
. toiiim, at all events sufficiently attached to him to come to him as soon as he had heard
that he hsd bad an attack of diarrhoear— Mr. Jones of Lutterwoith. Pafaner, intending to
go.to l49iidon» and not wishing to leave Cook alone, wrote on the Sunday to Mr. JoMs,
. telMng hisa that Cook was then ill with the diarrbcea, a statemmit which ia not altogether
/jmoonaiatent with the evidence of Dr. Bunford apd what Cookatated, and begs of him
•1o teome ivwet* I beg of you to pause here for a moment in order ta appreciate the M
V ipportamee of this^&et ; the more jou, think of it^the more psofouid will. be your coDvic-
■ii lion, .that it affinda evidence irrelragable of Palmer's, innocence* The imputation upon
orPalmer ls»'that he iatended to kill Cook to possels himself of his winnings. Who was
,1 Jirilh. Cook wktm the race waa won ? Who was Isf^' hia. side. on. ;Shrewatbiiry race-conne
J ^ th#;thre^ minntea that he waa speechless? Whoisamhimiakeottthis betting-bodcflBd
n owot hh wmni^gs? Who but Jaaes^«-Joiied who ^aaibis/boaem fiiend, his oompsnion,
nohis-eonfidantv and who knew to the last^fiirthis^ the. amount' of bis gains? Jones was,
],jof .aUjnw lining, the most likely lo be thenac^ent of.GooVs eonfldenc^ and the map
I |>o!widby(eveiy jconaidoration of honour, friendship and. affection to protect him, to vindi-
cate. Jb^a.qauacwjand to aiTengo his. death.- Yet thisiwasi the man for wImhu Palmer sent,
tbftth|9rmifl|ht.OQnvar8e.wit^ Ceokr cejceiiTe hie oonfideoce^ minister to bim in his illness,
and «r0Qrifeep'iii l^^^aane looia Willi hianl. , HoWfifBahner is the murderer they repre-
sent hiiUf areyop jto aofount ior haa,aompBtoMag> Jpne»to itbe bed-«ide of the sick nan?
If Cook j)aa% fttapwetedt-raa i9(ei are atewfed Jhedid<**<that- Pahner waa p<Mfioning him,
J^Bies was thejvaA to.whon^ he/,wo«ld laoit ariUi«igly.haiise unbosomed himself and in
whose ^edthfuL ear -hetiwould .have Kitaostr; eagerly ^diaburthoned the perilous stuff that
weighed upop.. his iew« ibrsfin^ iJoneatasweUja^FalmerfWas a medical man, and it is
not improbable tha^ in therOOurseof ihiastudiflS^tlUe Conner may have noted in his clsss-
book the venr passagss respecting the-opeaation, of strychnia which had attracted the
attention of the latter, la u eonosivable thal^iif Palmer meant to slay Cook with poison
in the dead of the night, he would have previously insured the presence in his victim's
chamber oi a medical witnesSt who would know finom his frightful aymptoma that the maa

. I

SBVBwrir xuNi Mat> 2u isse. 213

witt^0|iMBg & luitiin(l>d;9lith? H« briuMft^infedlcidiiiiii tatDtl^fiooixi, and makes bim lie
*^lhhi a fevr>i«d«ete of tiieaick nmp's bied^tliat )id majr b« startled by his terrific shrieks,
and gaae apoii those aganiraag^'oeiivalsioiDs wfaieii indicats thefatai fkrtency of poison !
Gaa yod belietre h9 He might ^hat^ despatched him by means that would have defied
detteotsoD, for Goeisiras taknagi noiphia oMdioihally, Bad a fffmm or two more would have
sileatly fhnown lu» inHoiau) etetnilV<sleisp?' iMiit instead of doingp set, he sends to Lutterworth
for Jeoes* • Yoa have beea< teld that^ this* was: done t» acnrer af^earances. Done to cover
appsanuwes t Noy-no^'iio I ' Yeui^naot bi^^etie it-^t is not in human nature— it cannot
•be true-^o« <]amiot'^df:hlm>guilQri^da dare* hot 'find him goilty on the supposition of
hstnitii^-tfaeoounivy wiU-inotataiid •% you if yMi believe vt to be true— you will be
imp^ched before tbei whole -woiid if you' Say- that ifisfrue^^I beliere in my conscience
that -it is fklse, bscamse, odnaist^ntly ir^ th<e ht^s'thst 'govevn hnmaa nature, it cannot
possibly he tvQ»/ - •' ' i, . • > .. ■• - . ^ of*, .-j..

Gentlemeh, Ihvve Sire other fkcts- «e >be advei'tM tO' befbre Isit deiwn, to wlaleh it is
necessary 'yeur* attention staohld be dvawn/ Ther^ waffa gHeat stir «t the hotel at Rugeley
' after Mr. Jones liad return^ from' London with My. Stevens, th^ executor. Mr. Stevens
arrives at the inn with Mr. Jones, has beien in"ciMiV«natioli< aU' the way down with
Mr. Jones, and has heard' Ifrem Mr. Jones all that Mr. J\dnes<kndws, and does not aj>pear
to- have had anything eommunloated to him by'Mr:'Joiafes'!#hieh eoold juMdfy any sus-
picion on hte part. Mr. Jdnes, !«^en th6y arrive at Rdgieley, Intrbdnoes him to Pahner,
imd Palmer atoned takes him up to the room of the 'dfe<^ msm, and unoofven' the body
down to the thighs, and Mr. Stevens lobftss at the cc^pse ttnd Sees there ar^ m^ convuteions
about the body except the clenching of the hands. He sees'thera is no evhaeiation, no
signs as he thmks of illness, and, wondering within himself; he says, ^''hbw can you have
died ? *' or something to that effect ; ** how grievous a thing it iS that youk* young lil^ should
have passed away ! " I think he said he did not loMc as if be #ereF deadi Aiter seeing l^e
come* they went down to dinner, and he asked Palmer to dine >#it9i him, and "Mr. Jones,
and Mr. Bradford, the husband of Mr. Cook's sister. He has >not been called f lie cottld
have told us if there was anything saspidous in thecotidacfiof Palmed, any tii$ta|^ that
eoald justify such conduct on the part of Mr. Stevens. They have their ^nn^, and when
their dinner is over, see what takes place. It is important yon should know it, beeause I
think you will see from the wa^ it occurred that the conduct of Palmer was the e<$ndttct
of a man certainly apprehensive of any sort of vexatious inquiry whi«hmi^t involve
kirn in pecuniary troubles, and was therefore anxious to conciliate • Mr. Stei^«, ■ Still
comporting himself like one who could firmly and freely maintain hi^ equality Widi Mr.
Stevens unabashed, with a clear brow and the appearance of an innocent man:' {The
learned SerjtaM read a portion, «/ th« dialogue which took place betwen Mr, 'iSiewntf'tkid
PainutrS) He said ^ with a spasmodie convulsion of the ^roat," which was f^erfecHy
apparent ; he ooidd not see his fh(te, but there was a spasmodic cOhvulsiba of hw Hirbht
Who could believe sueh a testimony! of guilt as tiurt ? He > expects that PttUwer • is tdube
bound to look after ev^rvtfaiag^ of every kind that was in the ho«ei behmgteg! fOi€d6k,
and because ho could not find a trumpery book, whidh anybedvmig^t harv^ttfkmn'a^y,
thinkii^ and probably having heard' it was ef very little use,' ^hi&h cbuld tfot iMS'Of ^<he
^htest servitein'aMy waytoPakner tfbraoypurpooe whatever, «rt4a»iyt<Mlfy,''«im^lT
on that- aieooanti he is' to^' indiUge itt this vexatious prooeedlng. The last time the bdbk
vrass^en wasiomtiie^MQiidaNr; - The^last person who saw it >ris BMzabeth Mllls/> ^»i^ ihe
Moaday, a^d on ^diat day thdre- were several peoh^le there w4l& Cook^Saixndcrrs* the' ttiiiner,
and the jockeys; after hisdeiitib<lfae'two serviCtiMnaids and the hot(sekeeper,< ^tiyil' thlee
madortaker's men^'the'tiro wdmsn who laid Oeok o«t, and somcother Mraons r «hd bltfber
who shaved him might'have taken the book, and having taken it could notfremnitf (for
kereacain is the effect ofdlshoUeSty^ii^'welliks fhlseheodv : Qnoe dttme^ v<ni< <flmno^ te^r
it; witiboat admitting itiyieu danbsc set -i^iright. again. I tiMrarrimputtttion on^^bjbodyi I
simply say, that asimany p)aio|^h«uL aocTess'to theitk)om)''i«i»^<>t'lhJr,' it>iS49k>t>M|ht
nnder the cireamstanoes wheit wmahv^ie didi^^iii' suieb a ettse' o^xiemenfcttti^im^^^taice
vrithoutany assignabbe yeaM»^for'liirptirlolniii|i tJhe'4>e«titfg4Mdk;»io:fix{H «i]t^hhn 'With-
out imy proof that he ever had i«^in<tiis^lMMdeinwihM>{|fofldfig Uke^aiprop^f seHi^h<'#a8
made for it until some time titftei* Coeik'i''deaA; ^ir aidted whethenthe diaii^rs«wel-e'hot
fall of liaen and clothes^ the abfic^iHirifS niMvt ^^'^wete.^' It^^niA ttof iseeti hnme^ltefely
after tihe death-, 2ior was there ataV'stfireh'Biade^r-itj'tior was'itiietiasidis'ii^ Haken <9are
of in the room, so that it couM not*^b«Vei)w«n^ettND(ved byiPlAnerwith'a jgefflty int^ntton
of purloining- H. Let us go'on for s^menient'' wUh^ this >dULlo^fU«^fA^' iMhied Setf^kni
thmread a passage from thedieUwfu4 (t0^UMed''iniihe~'4V8ien^)^i^-iUA3^9A^ aftei' goading
and irritating the man for all this-tii^e,tftodgb Pahner wafe^ wtllintt to make explanations
and provoke inquiries into any thin|t or 'Olmumsthnce whifSi if Inquired htto would at
once havts led to a discussion of'tfatfeiwin a foir and-ge&tiemanlike manner, Stevens

214 TffiAIf or WXL1.W1 FAUf8&

Anibfthim by addog himirh«ther lie inteBicU to be *t tfaepost-iaortetit ; and at last, when he
faye " it is a matter of iiMU|refeace< to nue,*' goad* the poarnian intp layiiig, "so it is to
me." That is tlw only woid of irritation that Pahncr-^who kept hit gBonnd doring the
whole time and stood up to this man — that is the only word of initatton that he iiied«
Mr. Stevens speaks to him in a very warm manner, -yet Palmer manifests the composnn
of a ffentlemany of a man of feeling and ooosid^catioA to the Jrtbtr--as h» eoHed him-
self— ^at the stepfather of the youn^ man^sad that is to be tamed into evidence of goih.

There is another story made against lum, that he was. found aeanhing in Ae peckets
of Mr. Cook shortly after his death; it is the most absurd saggostion on their own*
showing. The facts were these. Mr.^ Jones» I thiak» lold the senaals to tell Paiaier to
oome into the room* I think that was it — to tell Palmer to go into the room ; and then I
think Mr. Jones told another servant to follow him into the room* £liaahetl| Mills is the
witness to that. She says, *' I went in and I saw him looking about seeing if there w»
aayihiag in one of the coati, and he also looked under the belsler of tiie bed^ just ss a
gentleman might be kK>iiing for a wateh f and he went on doing so after I got into the
room." It was quifto elear she sospeeted nolliing, and I sahimt it is not fidr that any
8afl|>iGMn should attach to him on the subject.

One other ciroumstanee there is on which reliance has been placed ; and althon^
it has been said gaeat reliance is not intended to be ]daeed upon it, I cannot tdl w^
^eet it will prodiBce on your miadsv 1 am sure that when tiiose who have promoted this
prosecution first undertook it, the^ intended to rely, as proof of damning ^niit, on the
msAUscript extracts about strycbniia in these medical books. I think it wiU be «idiin
your experience 'that in youth and early mstthood the best prot ectioii that a man ean
have for bis honour and integrity is the company and society of a wifie whom he loi«s.
If you find a man in early youUi. attached to a virtuous young womaii» whom'he loves
with a sincere and heartfelt attachment, depend upon it he is of a gentle nature, and little
prone to deeds of violence. They have put in these books to show that Palmer hsd a
knowledge of strychnia poison, and they are the books which he used when a student
attending lectures in London, as must have been known to bis deceased wife. I find, in
what I am in a condition to prove to be her own handwriting; proof positive that tbis
was his student's book, and that he then and long after loved that young woman in the
way in which it is God's will, under the sanction of His holy ordinance, young men
should love their wives. His marriage was a marriage of affection ; he loved her for
herself and for her person ; he loved her as ardently as he now loves her fiirst'-bon), his
only surviving child, a boy of seven years old, who waits with troubling anxiety for a
sentence which will restore him to his fatiier's arms, or drive that iather to an
ignominious death up<m the scafiEold. He loved her with a pure, generous affecdon.
There is proof positive in tbis letter, copied in her handwriting into his note-book, that
such a man was William Palmer when only a few years younger than he is now i-^

** My duMMt 4«nie»'^I snaKch a moment to write to yma dear, deanr iitde self. I
need seaicoe^.aay the principal induoement Iharve to workM'tfae'deBim of getting my
studies finished^ so as .to- be id>ie .to ptesa yettr <dear little fonu Ivsay amis* With best,
best love, believe me, dearest Annie, your own William."

J^ipw this is not the sort, of let^r<;th«ti8.geaenkllyi read in conctanf ja8tioe.r It was
no.paji^t of , jcoy instructions to read it to yott». hut that book.waa.pai in-'to prove that this
man was a wicked, heartless, savage despena^ ^lad.IiBhoar yourfffouk.it wliat he was
wh^nthat letter was writteii — ^what his ^oefi^sed wife knew him to be when she cc^ied
it^a young man who loved a young woman for her own take — cloved her with a pare and
virtuous affeotion, such an affection as would in almost all natures be a sure antidste

Such, gentlemen, is the man whom it is my duty to defends Upon the evidenee
which is before you I cannot believe lam guilty. Do not suppose fior a moment that he
is<$)Mmd«9ied. in. this . dreadful strait; by his Jnuly -Imd ifriends^ An aged mother) who
xnay have disapproved of some parts of his condiiet» expects in an agony of grief your
veij^pt*, 4 dm sUt^rt^^n. scarcely 6uafeain,«heaself nndsr the'Saspease whlcb presses
npon her. A gallant and devoted brother atfMidsby bin to defend himyspefingnsitibcr

tune nor labour to save him from ^n awful dooou I call upon you tm expand yvfoir
mindt to a capacity fbi; estitnating th« high duity that you have to p^rfiarm. You have to
atom the torrent of prejudice j you have to viadioate the honour .and character of yoQf
eonntry* yon have Witii firmness and courage to do your duty, and find a verdict for the
Crown, if you believe th^t guilt is proved ; but if you have a doabt upon the poiat,
depend upon it lfie*l&aie wUl some Vh^n the innocence of this man will be jBBf^^
apparent, and when you will deeply regret any want df due and calm consideiatibn of
the case whieh-it wiH be my d«ty to lay* ^idliMre-yoa. ■

EieHTH DAY'S TEIAL.

May 22, 1856.

Ltt^ OAiia«E£&.--*BeM« pftH^eeAfng iHth thift trial I must express a most esntett hofpe
that uiitii it is ^eoiidttded ^ft pMie j^ommds ^11 eo&tlniie to abstain ttom any oomments
on the merits of th^ ease or any part of the eiridenoe. The propriety of this is so obvious
as to reqiiB*e no explanation. I would say, at the suggestion of my learned brother
AldersoU) that this warning ought to extend as much to me insertion of letters as to edi«
ianal articles.

Mr. THOMAS NUNNELEY swprn^-Exasaiaed by Mr. Grove.
I believe you are a Fellow of tilie CoUs^e «f Stvgeona«Bd Professor of Sttrgery at tha
"Leeds School of Medicine? Yes.— You are ala» a Basmber^ I beEsive^ «f seTend feveign
snd Engli^ seientiHc soeiatias? Yes^-^H^w long ibaveyou beea<ia practice? Between
20 and 30 years.— Have you had a large pnctlce ? . Yaa.f-»Ha¥e yau sesn cases of tataniia
in youriaxpieii«nc(^aftd<M?.eoaYii]aiOB^ ? <Both taranmatioiaad idiq^Bilfaio«<t<nHow many eases
or idiopathic tetanus have yon saen in your awts eosperieaas ? f owk-^Oui Ihey all com-
mence with the symptoms of lock-iaw 2— Kq, Haw i&ny did not ffomaienoa with t^t ?
One did not ; nor -did lock-jaw occur.

Lord CAMPBEUu^-Not at all ? Very sUgbtly : it did not occur sufficiently to prevent
iwallowing during the whole period of his iUness.

Mr. 6h\)ve, — You have been present during the evidence given here as to the Sym*
ptoms of Mr. Cook ? I have. — Uad you previously read the portion of the depositions as
to the scientific and medical part of the case ? Yes, carefully.— Judging from the sym-
ptoms as described, and confining yourself to the evidence as to the sdentific part of the
Case, what is jrour opinion as to the cause of death in Mr. Cook's case ? He died from
some convulsive disease. — On what do you fbund that ? I Ibund it Upon the difference of
the symptoms described in the deposition and on the evidence before the court.

Ix)rd Campbell. — This is not satisfectory ; we cannot ask {he witnesses what fkith
they ^ve to the evidence of the witnesses as contrasted with the depositions. This
witness's opinion ought to be founded on the vivd voce evidence of the witnesses given
during the trial.

Mr. Serjeant Shee — ^I should submit, my Lord, he may well be asked what his opinion
was on the depositions in the first instance^ and then what it was after h& heard, iim avi"
dence in this court.

Mr» Baron Ajlpb«sq^.— rWhy was l»e kapt in court to haair the evideiMie ?. " .

liovd QjjOBmLL.-'^^M a .matter of sdeacahe nay be a^ed whait hia Op^oti is upon
what he seea ia thesa depost^ot»» but> yea must ask it separataiy; I ■kKmld-faafva-lllMmglit
themor^ ounvement coaita /would be :ttetyoa should ask his opinioii on theF'««hMt^Mx;<r

evidence. '-• , . , ,

Mn Babost AxBa»H».«-^«a ean atily put the depositions in to contradict the wit-
i^esses where they are orMShaxamlneel, atid I am not awafe any of the depositions are in
evidenoe except the siridaiMe of Elisabcrt^ MUte; Mr; Jones, and Mr. Bamfbrd. ' ...'!]

Mr. Serjeant Shee, — ^We do not ask him any opinion he may have forpxed on the whole
ofthedepoations. ' ■ • -

The WUneaj — ^Hie depositions I have referred to are those of the witnesses- esMuninf^'
liere. , \ • . - -

Mr. (hvfje, — ^As to the symptoms described in oqvt ? » , . ; , ,v}

Lord Campbbuu.— On the symptoms described by tkw witnesses^ what is yottr'^plbfioa ^-^
That it was some convulsive disease.

Mr. &roQe.— Had the previoos state of health of Mr. Oook anything to dp '^ith that
opbdon, or any effect on your jddgment ?- Y<S8. * ' '

Mr. Baron AildebSOn.-^TMs is' a short mode'of ekainining a medica). man as tp.sv4»T
ptoms which he is to give his opinion upon, therefor^ it must be careiufiv protecied. Yoii
are asking him as to whit took plac^ at Shrewsbury.' "What right has l^e to take that int»
consideration? ' - *' i - .

Mr. ^rootf .—^tate your, own pounds, lr^,yo^r,d)mT??^y,i5^r'tBaii,opu^ ISX taka
the evidence whicK has occurred in court— T,, , ,. ... /

Lord CAMPBSLU--The evidence of thft^syinptoms of Jfto Btrsons Croofeos Matad by
the witnesses I Not merelj the sym^mSi, but the g^n^al , st«l« of health.

21fi < TiaAL .OF WlVmiK FttBliBB.

LoidCAMFiiBUft*-^Biitire'hi0r6iiotiimgtod»'Witii.lli*l( *. ."-^.- ^.v. '..r*' r

Mr. Serjeant 8hee,--Yoti liave biefen pr^Mnt in eooiPV dnfiflg ihe "wtiakt of fbi»>trifll ? I
have. — ^Yon have heard the eyinptoihs desei^bed by the wltii<96ses of Btr. Cook's 'heiMk
preTionsIy to his final attaeks at Rogel^; thd deMrljiticm Of thenetittl ffjraiptoiiig dariag
the paroxysm of the fits irhidh' halve' Men s|k)k^n toj*aA;d the tfopcaraneeB Of the boijr
on post-mortem examjnatioii ? Y(M.-^4Ittve yott «tteiided< alBO to du -eyidciiBe of Dr.
Savage and other witnesses Tespeotiiig'th«-d«ii(!ac)r(]if-M««on«litiilkN»?' • "

s The Attomep-Gen^vU.—ltou. kre assnitilttg that'; 'Iho'witiie^ hais taiid §0. -

Lord Campbeix. — I wish most eai^nestJy and sincerely to' tesisj yoii, hrofhiet Sliee, but
it seems to me the 'witness' should give his opiiiioli qtr, the iSymptbms d^feenhed, and then
state what influence the other facts may hare had' on hi« mitidl

The Attomey-G^efteraL—t do not Ob^ iJb'mf ft\^iA "rfefeifrfpg to any et^ence, bttt he
should not state what the evidence is, beeadse m thkt we di^er.

Mr. Serjeant Shee, — ^You have attended to the evidence ' in thifi cafte as to the general
health of Mr. Cook/theistafetiienis flmdij ' I'^lspecthstg the 'appettrances' of the body, the
throat in particular, before and after death, and the general descriptioa of 1he'<iiottditiO& oif
the body on the post-mortem eitaiiiiiiaiioti'? I havo/^^Do yoaTaaembeff thetaocOtuatiitfaat
were given of what was said or supposed Ao be ayphitita^aofea? - f '

The Attomey'GeneraL — ^But there was bo sodi thing said.

Mr. Babom AyJwcR80Wf^*-*SBppoBing a penon had syphilitic sores, what would you say
then ? that is the way of putting it, but the other embodies his belief of the case. A
medical maa haa bo right to ^ve us bis opinion of the facts of the case, but what voald
be the real symp^oquB mm a given disease.

Lord CAMt>BiEix.-^We nrast take it that medical men are not to be substituted ion the
Jury. . , , .

Mr. JiTsmcE Cbs^sweix. — ^If I were to suggest a mode of meeting the thing, it would
"he this, — ^let the gentleman describe what he assumes to be the state of the deceased's
health at the time ; then the Attorney-General may say he is not justified in so assamiog.

Mr. Serjeant Shee, — Will you do that, having heard the evidence ? 1 assume him to
.have been a man of very delicate constitution ; that for a long period he felt himself to be
ailinff, for which he had been under medical treatment ; that he had suffered from syphilis;
that he had disease of the lungs, and that he had old-standing disease of the throat : he
?ed an irregttlar Hife; he was aubject to mental excitement and depression; that after
death appearances were found in his body which show this to have been the case ; there
.was'ftmiid an mnnsHal appearance within the stemaoh, the throat was in an unnatural con-
dition, the back of the tongue showed similar indications ; that the lungs were in vi
;«aBapby8ematmis c«ftditioa» tihe air-ceUs dilated j that in the linixw of the aorta, or large
artery of the body, there was an unnatural deposit, and that there was a very unusual
^ogpeanmce in the, membranea of the i^»nal marrow : these are the indications which are
unnatural in the post-mortem examination : I should also state it is described by one of
the witnesses that there was a loss of substance of the penis.

Z, Lord Campbell. — ^That is one of the elements of y6tr opinion ? Precisely, my
')(iprd ; that scar described in the penis could only hisve resulted from an ulcer.-^IX)
jou mean from a chancre? Yes; it may have proceeded fVom'hn: nicer: anidcerisa

Jrtmacre- , . . .* ' .

The Attorney-General, — ^Ajft ulcer is not neoessarily a chancre ? No.
f . vMr. Serjeimt J^tee^r^To what do you ascribe the i^mptomayou have referred to under
:the tongne? The syi^ptoms on the root of the tongue, and the throat I ascribe to

syphillUo in^mmation of the throat,— Supposing, the symptoms wjiich you have described,
(Wj^t would you infer as .to the condition of tl^t man's health and constitution at the
vtime ?^ 'J^haX liis headth had not been good fbr long,' and that his constitution was delicate:
.thore is another groupd j it was stated his father and mother both died young.

Low! CAiwiBEW^-r^riiis is prt o^tHe, fpwxdation of your opinion? Yes; it was

stated by Mr. Steviens .that. his £»tb£r .^nd mo&er had diied young, and that the

brother and sister were both delicate., ' . ,

Mr. Serjecmi £&«f.-rSap^08Wg.that fto haifo been the state of health of Mr. Cool^'
would that state of health, m your opinion, or not, make him liable or subject to nervous
iztitation ? I should think aou^r«Iii your ju^^pasent, as a medical man, would other causes
besides physical c«uae>, moral: <ca«9es Jfor inatanoe> tend in persons in such a state of
health and conatitatioB to excite nervous irritation ? Yes. — What description of moral
or mental caosea of initatlon, in. your judgment, might tend to bring on nervous
initation? Aay «aooiteBa«nt or depvestioQr-^^ppofie a bordered state of the stomacli

or of the bowels supervened, «bcii'lse'««ndi in tet oonditidii, wfaiA eflhotdoyoa think it
irotfld. faftM? TiMUwonld ▼ery'.inach ^efiwui on t]»^,Tiqlepise of it—Bat if it was
Yicikeiit, to tbe extent «£ .Asequenf and eontmuous vomitiog fair spvend days, what effect
venid that, fasre on. a state of mind and oonstitiUioii such as you have supposed ? It
wottld produce a. greater effae* thaa in j^h^^thy person; uo peculiar effect— Woujid
wkf 'uijuvioua>«fifett be pffodnged cm arpersont^u li^^ sta^ ^i mind and constitution
which you have supyond ^ espuduve jtOt-wetiandcoUi'? . jt wo^ild have a ffreater effect
than on a healthy Pf^JM^^ itW,^|>W,pro^^^.flfflfj^ .S^jas LUiiess; perhaps I had better
give an ^3i;pl|vi?^t^on qf ,my 9plni9n. ,,,•., ~ ,^ ,^^ .

Lor^ CAM?9Exiu--ryour opi|iiou on what? . Ou tie conditioa of the constitutioa
when a convulsive disease is more Jiikely to ^upfirve^^.

Mr. &^0(pU /95^.— What iijoi^ldyo^. infer from, the ^ct, supposing it to have
occurred, that three days before 4eatJi he suddenly a\Foke in the middle of ihe night in
a State of described madness for two or three minutes ?

, The. Attom^-General, — " I was half mad for two or three minutes : I was awoke by
anoiseia the, street" ' « ./

iMAiG^MBfAELLir^^A jwkx hypothesis that he wm mad? . "»

Mr. Serjeant 8hee* — ^That hesaid he was mad.

Lord Campbell. — ^You must p«t the wholo of it. -

Ifia H'afnfss.^-^ understand he had three attaokaen simeeediBgrnigfati, each occorring
about the sscme hour.

VLt, iSerjeant Shee. — ^Wotifd you, as a medScs^' maB, drair onw ittfenmoc f rom thai
drcumstance ? Yes ; that they were of a convulsive ehaMietet*,'ln tAicalMeUce' of Other
eanses to account for it. — ^Aecording to yoar penBonal expcrieMee and Iraowledge, aa
derived from the study of your profession, are convulsive effects very various in theit
ffanns and degrees of violence? Aa various as possiblc-Hh^ it possiibWi^lw^ys^'wiUi
aoencaeyy to> asorihe particular symptoms of convulsions to ^oy one • of thei cla^ of con^
iniaioBs into whicAi they are divided by medical auth<»s ? Certainly it is liot possible
to glufe a . definite name to every convulsive attack. — ^Are theDe nmny forms of violent
couvubiona in, which the patient retains his consciousness ? Not a great many forms of
convulsive disease $ there are some. — ^Will you have the goodness to mention some of
them?. Hysteria.

' 'LoKi CavPBECDi*^Does that apply to the male sex ? At times ; it is far more common
inltmales.

Mr. 8erf&imf'€h&eM^Afe tliere any Ibrms Of convulsions, epo&eptic in Shetr ohatacter,
in which the patient retains his consciousness? It is so stated. • • :>

Lord C Aitp^ElL.— HavB you met with any ? No ; not duribg a lit.— Bu* it is dut^
i statfe of fit we are in^uiriilg?' I harii not. ' • ' • ; i .1 ...

Mr. Bauon "Aldebson,— Not during your fwentf or lliirty, years* totttctjcie? *W>6t
duringepilepsy. '' , ^ ., /.':;!'! '."u

Mr, JSefJietint SiAf^^^pOYpit. kjaow by your readme as a medical man that, tliai thing
leally does son^etimem oibcur? ; Yes { t was about to add that the de^ee of coiii^ibtiini'ess in
epilepsy varies very, /ni^^,: ^i^, somQ attacks the consciousness is' altogethet'lost.— Aire
convulsive attacks sonietimes accompanied Wrdi Violent spasms, ind wltH rtgiditV*'^

portions of the body ? - Yes. — ^Do convulsions, properly so called, originally k
something ofthectopiesfibn Of tfetailc'afffeCti6h?*'Th^y<W. '• '^- - - *' '^1

toi-d CAMPB^L.-^War'Vbii ^piait -Vi^hat yott/ihfean TSy "conftilsiotis ^ *%!<*
called "t 1 understand 'fi'om'tlieleirted's^tleant'B qtie^m -•fhfift fs' brdinttvi^ybaawl
a convulsive disease, eithfe^ from inMcydrffcm other' d^^ UttAii^Jy^^

Mr, Serjeant iSf^e.— Have.ywi* read Bie, jja^sage ' from ^^*^}i^'i^, ^^^Ti'^'^^^'^2
read yesterday to the Court? ,1 fta^^. — ^1)q j[ou a^ee in wnjit' Uf: Coplarid thbte stalTCr?
I do. — ^Wheur you say that convulsions sometimes'Wsutne a* tetania ftfrfil pbio.
appearances, do you mean, tfie'c'^'^'ftijjn^'of %lilc& !ie'i4ites-4!t^^
what convulsions do yon 'm6an? CbnVufeibhs' irl^u^ frotec'kliiibgt^'tfhy 'fekusd, wtWliis
in chUdren wiU produce it; affections of the braii^^il Wd^iWdV hj^ttAaf iW^i^Hf^-'^i
chloroform to some persons.*— I» it mai&vBmA w*th?jyita^ki«nrl«*ge that aduljs are tome-
times affected with such convulrtcttte?*^*!* ia^«ttliilig iudtgttstiblfe^ftlod wiltprodace it—
Hive you known instancfes in' whi«h 'it'lwW'ttBsen'.flHim ^etofain)^ hhd'Voknitiiig? » N©,
1 do not kuow ihat I ha'vei^D6' yom-feigree ^tk -Dr; ObplHtid«aa<to these 'CbnvalsioifB
sometimes ending immediatciy' in deatik? ' ^ Ye«>^Do ykwi* agi^e also with the maBU^r
in which he states that death 'Occurs itt ^h^s€ cases? when a mto die* in one of the
convulsions of which you Inrre bees ipe^iu^'Whttt ^s thC'teiniediaftsrp^ximate cmiio
of his death ? Frequently it will be asphyxia.

%19 XBUL w mvunM nUOBL

Lend CAimanA.-— From foffiieatiiMw Urn MAioB. of tte iiiibatui ' ^ innttdl^ ^btfti^
stopped ? From the air not ftnlerin^ the langt or tea spomi ^ tlie *lie»t— Y<m
do not term tbat arohjxia? It will prodote simikr •ppeinOMsift.«--¥oa do not edl
that a^rUiyxia ? Perhaps aot* — ^I ask ysa* do 70a oali desf^ fkoa ^aaoM -of fte hesrt
aqphyxia? It is often so deschhod«

Mr. Serjeant £%mw— Do 70a agveo with l>r. Copland HHEt the eonYuMdnd of fhe
character whioh yoa have dMoribed srs s< na « liiii es meoMtt^.

The .d<iam«y*^it0fiera/,« — YOa toe constantly aslmg thi^ ^nfleman whether he agrees
with Dr. Cophind; 70a shoal<]fask him what his view is on some particular point.
ToQ wJU not caH Dr. Copland.

Mr. Serjeant Shee. — ^Why should I call him?

Lord Caxpbbvl, — That kind of question cannot he snppofted.

The Attomey-GeneraL — It is getting the opinion of a man without oal^ng him.

Lord CAMP9BI4L. — U will be still niore regular if you ask his own opinion.

The Wiinesi, — ^I haye seen convulsions recurring.

Mr. Serjeant Shee. — At what intervals have you known them to recur? Veiy wwov^*'
sometimes in hours, in other cases days. — How soon have you known the patient
suffering from a violent paroxysm of such convulsions as you have descrihed, become
easier? That is very various. — How soon have you seen it? It may be hours or
]&iniites.>^Wo^ yon- draw aaoyinforenoe as to the nature and character of a convulsion
from the interval which elapsed between one convulsion and another? Tes.— Wltst
infereAee wwnld yott dittW'^ It is depcn^t On some slight iititation in the brain or
spinal cord.-— Do.yon knofw whether, when death takes place in the paroxysm of such
convulsions, it sometimes happens in posfrfliovtem ewimiBationB there is no trace of
disease in the body : does that sometimes happen? Yes ; by that I snppose you mesn
organic diseasc-^Have yoa knoFwn at all or freqoenlly in persona, 'not InrHier advanoefl
in years than theage o£ twen^naiglbbt, gnnuks between thedira mater and the arachuM^
Tliey are not common to any age that I am aware oil — ^What inference woidd yon cob-
sider yourself at liberty to draw from there appearing in poM-mortem eaamintioDf
between the arachnoid and dura mater of a man of twenty-eight years of age ? I da d<^
laiow any particular inference could be drawn from that particular appearance in a^
individual. — ^Would they lead you to any reasonable medical conjecture as to tw
cause and thdbr effect? That is not a veiy easy question to answer; they might <yf
might not.

Lord Campbell. — ^Have you formed any opinion as to the cause of aooh tUag^i
say aye or no ? No, my Lord.

Mr. Serjeant Shee, — ^Might th^y in year judgment produce any elfeot on the e^^
cord ? Yes, they might ; there are preparations in mnseuma where grammes are fonnd
in the men^bianes of the spinal cord in which the patients are said to have died of
tetanus. *

The .A^orn^-^tfn6ra/.**^ever mind what is said.

Mr. Serjeant Shee.-^Do you know whether granules have "been part of the symptw"^
of 4etBnifom convulsions ? I have just stated there are three preparations, and I b^^*
seen. them/ n^sdf.'^-^'Where have jrou seen them? In St. TTiomas's Hospital museum.-"
In order to. ascertain with satisfaction to yourself the nature and probable extent of ii^o^
of such granules, how soon after death woi^Id you think it desirable the spinal em
should be examined? Immediately. — Could any satisfactory medical judgment ^
l(M3ned from an examination made as long as two or three months after the death of tbs
deceased? Ndt the most remote.

The-^«ome!/-6?CT»«ra/.— Of their effect? Their effect on the spinal cord itself; »o'®
ttpBcially if the brain had been previously opened.

Mr. Serjeant Shee. — Independently of that appearance of granules between the dttra

w*. »A «iwrv Mumx ovKMA o U1.15Q luiuuiu ui buiut; KunjLUir cnaugc, 11 nugni nave www- ---

oevered ; but m^dier softoiing nor indnratim (^ the minute structure of the cord coiu»
he detected; the minnte nervous structure changes within two hours of death^l°
ofder to eeeertain the condition of that nervous structure, does the eye sometimei 1^^^
tbe assistance c^ ** ^^^ • * "^ ._- .1 ...-'. i. .•. ua/i^s.

-^Is that ewer

Yes. — ^Have yeu ^ ^ ^ ^ ^^ ^..^

^«ve^"4)o you agree u what has bM stat^ that that genenOly begins ^anattack

fflPSHTH DAY, May 92, 1^50. 21^

tiie jaw f Q^mmmif U^oe$/— Hav«'yon hud airy iexperienee Vf personal observation of
idiopathie tetaiws? 4' have, fear cases ; -one of tbem was iny own child. — In those cases
of idjopathie. tataaas, wi^ wlkat a3nBptooM did tiie dise^Me comtnenoe ? In three of them
with loek«-jaWy«Be'iiotr^How 4id the Amith case of idiopathic tetanus commence ? In
the body ; the power of swallowing easily wi^ retained to Ibe last.-^-Have yon had any
personal experience in caseaiwfhieh you bave known, or now know to be cases of tetanus
produced by strychnia? I have laade a pMt^noftem examination of two persons who
have died from the poison of strychnia within the last twelve montlis. — HaA you seen
the patients in either of these cases before death ? I had not, I did it by order of the
t}oroner. — Was it by chemical analysis you ascertained the deaths had been caused t^
strychnia ? In both. — Are you able to inform the Court how soon after the death of the
person whose bodv you examined in both these cases your examination took place ? I
have my minutes here.-^Talbe them separat^Ay ; how soon after the death in the first case
did thejpo«t»mortem axaniiBalion take platee ? The one case was a recent one, forty-two
hours after death, the other thirty hours. — ^Direct your attention to one of those cases at
a time ; was the body entire when the post-mortem examinatito took place ; had it been
opened ? No. — Will yon npw describe the appearance of the body at that post-mortem
examination? (^ITie loitness produced ct peg^r.)

Iiord CUttPBELL. — Is that the written statement you made. M> tiie OroBW ? It is.

Mr. Serjeant Slee,^—Then if you will read it, yoa cain give his Lordship a copy (the voitness
read his report on the case cUluded to) : will ^oa have the goodness now to tell us the appear-
ances of the body in the second case which you refeisred to, where the examination wa^
made thirty hours after death ? I first saw the body abont twelve hours after death.

The Mtomey-General — ^This is the second instance? Yes. — Was it a man or a
woman? A womaa in bo(th instances, I believe I have the age down*; in the former the
age was twenty-eight ; the second was a young woman somewhere near twentj years of
age ; there is no diffiealt^ in meutioimig the name of the second if you wish it (tJie
uUnesa read his r^^): I should mention, ia addition, that' there wM' fluid in the mem-
branes of the spinal Qord ; it is entirely correct except that.
. Iiord C4XFBbi<Im— Is that what you gave in evidence before the Coroner ? It is.

Mr, Serjeant Shee. — You have stdted you have seen a person under the influence of
stfychnna poison? When taken accidentally in too large a dose.-|-Who was that person;
what was her age ? I have seen 'more than one case in my practice where persons have
taken too large a dose. — ^Have any of those cases been fatal ones ? No.— Had you the
means of knowing what the dose was, and how soon aft«r it was taken the strychnia
paoosi^sma eaine on ? i^ut one sixth of a grain. — What was the sex of the patient f
A man.— What age ? Middle age*— How soon after the ingestion of the poison did the
aymptoms appear ? Airefyr-^swimiftntear—^In what form had it been given? Solution.
— What ware the symptoms? Want of poowr of controlling the inusoles.— Where wa*
ihe patient whea attacked? Up, and walfc^g about. --I& what way did th^ want of
power of oontrolling the mascles first manifest itself? By twitchinjr and rigidity, with
acmie cramp, more vident in the lungs than any part of the body. — Can you giveui* any
notion by description of what the nature and degree of that rig^di^ aad^ose twiteMngs
were? They were not very violent ; it was not a severe case. — ^How long did they coli*
tinue ? It was six hours before the spasms entij«ly diflapf>eared.-T>Duri]ig1hoseiBix;houM
were they continuous in their diaracter or intermittent ? Init«rmittent.-^t what' in*
tervals? Varied; as the effect passed off the intervals, became langer; every tiro Of
three seconds at first.— Were they comhatcA by medical treaimeat^ No. — ^Wfaal
quantity was taken ? One-sixth of a grain ; I ^^ prescribed oae^welfth of a grasn.*^
"Will you describe tiie other case ? The other case was very samilacrf— How mnush 4id
you prescribe in the other case ? One-twelfth of a grain. , - , '.

Lord CAUPBELX.~-And what quantity had the patient taken in th^ cihet. caaa5
About one-sixth of a grain.--He toc3t double what you prescribed ? Yes. /

Mr. Serjeant Shee.-^ Are these all the .cases in which yon have had an op^poiftmiity «€
witnessing the effiects of strychnia poison? On the human b«4yr-THave yowexperi-
meated extensivcQy on animus with the strychnia poison ? On upwards lof siaty.— What
animals were those ? Dogs, cats, rats, mice, guinea*^g8, rabbits, arogs^ and -toads.— What
baa been the general character of the attack on tnose animals whennndter the> influence
of the etryolmia poison ? Great general resemblance in all anim a ls; aume are much more
8nscei»tible to its action than others, and bear a v«y much less dose.— -How soon aHer the
ingestion of the poison, generally speaking has.its action made its appearance by symptoms
in the animal? From two mmutes to thirty ; more. generally abont five or six.— What
has been the usual interval between ingesMon imd paEosyamSi where the poison has not

230 TBUl^ or YfflMm. Pi4afl<%

been admiaict^ivd i» a Mlvtioa? T)ie.pm)d.,o( ^9m I hspt mfiifd^alMNU^fve ttin^ii.
—How did joa administer it f Oc c a <n < Mn lly in igluti«y Uut ]aac«;£«Mc«U7 >n A» lolid
state. — ^In what form ? OccanonaUy in solatioa : iwpetimgs ^l|«!ed dirr oa ihe back part
of the tongoe, and eap» flui4 pwed, di^wn the tKroiit ; sometupef ^luues^ bstween two
portions <9 meat, gqmeiunes mixed ^np with buUer .or stfet* . and aometun^ roU^ m .
small pieces of the cat of an aiumal i it is ^yai^ 'm the sli^.p^tti^g th^.&ogor tpsd iato s
solution of it, and IhaTe also applied it du:ect to the spiiiail^rd, Mpd^Uo to,.tbe hnin.—
What have been the first sjmptom^ of the yun^ aVy ying came.iili4«r i^inflnencf^.of ^
strychnia poison? A desire to be quite still. — ^What ]9ext^yH<MFpe4 br««Jlwg.-r-And
then? SlaTeriDff of the month when giyan at. the mouth.*r!whatf then? Twit^^ung of
the ears, trembGng of the mnscles, and inability to walk. apd^nVtilsion of sllthe
moscles of the body ; ihit jaws generally being finnly closed dann|; cpnvtilsioDs ; then
conyulsions, followed by a total want /of power in tne muscles, trhicli in thcf iai^t Kttacki'
were thrown into violent ^Msms, with a galvanic-like shock nnmihg throtigh them; this
also occurs if the animal attempts to more.'

liord CAMPBELU-^pasms come on ?^ ^^sms come on if th6 animal is 'either toaclied .
or attempts voluntarily to move ; that 5s the usual course ; occssionaDy tlie animal U
aUe to move. — Without a recurrence of the spasms ? Tes.

Mr. SerjMoU ^hee^r^Jio yon wish ,to add .anything to the description ? Xe, except to
say that these ffipoams occur at various periods; thfl anjmals die at varioos periods up to,,
three and a half houJlh which is the longest period at which I have knownan animal diei
in cases where ajiimals live for any great lensth of time the violent convulsions occar at
less frequent intervajls '• in every case before death the rigidity ceases, X do not know one
exception, and the ^uiseles are quite soft and powerless.

Lord CaMraBU<.-«**]naocid ? FUiecid, and the limbsiMigr be put ia any. pofito
whatever.

Mr. Serjeant 8hee, — ^Being put in an^ position^ does the rigor mortii eome on qniqker
or slower than in Ofdinaiir eases?. I thmk there is little diffinenor; afkr aU ooavaUiye
deaths I haive observed the si^me whero I have destroyed animals by hydrocyanic siid
and chlorofono. — ^Wlth re^^ect to the rigidity in comparison with strychiua poison,
what has been the extent of the rijgidity with the animals which were destroyed by other
n\ineral poisons ? I think there is very little difference; in the two women it was much
less than usuaL

Lord Campbell, — ^Do you mean much less than common ? Yes, in natoial disstse.

Mr. Serjeant Shee. — ^Yon mentioiied some slight symptoms, a denre to be qaiet, dat«P-
ing at the mouth, twitciiiii^ of the ears, which precede 'the violent cimvukieas ? Yet.-^
r^d they occur in the order you have stated, or did they vary in different cases ? in the
osdar I have Bamed.---Ii#w Ions was that befona the eonvokioiis? tYtfry- varying in-
tervals. — ^After the occurrence oisuch a paroxysm as you have described, have frou fcaovn
any ini^anfif pfa ease Qf* poison bv stiychnia administered to the snin^ in whiph there
has been any considerable interval between the first paroxysm and the second ? Yes, I
have just stated that. — What is the longest, that is what I want to know ? Bo you mean
between the violent convulsions? . Yes. — ^About half an hour, I should think, but it is
jiot common.

• >fiMfd<3AaiMMBBUb^"-Betni6Sn parcacytaisr Yesi '

Mr. Serjeant Shee. — ^After the animals had been killed by the strychnia poison, yon
have exftinitted thiibddles, no doubt IP lPpWBfi»oi' forty .>-ln what condition have 70a
fdufid the hesrt? 'Invariably fbll on the fight side: very generally the left ventricle
finnly oontnuAfedy' and the blood nsiailly dark and often fluidU- Are there any other post*
mortem appearances of the body which you have found consistently, as to the spine m
pasrtienlar ? There ia no pactiealar appeaiaace attached to the spine. — ^Have you ex]^n-
mBttt^ hu^y 'Wilh- other .pnHSfms peodneingi sadden death with animals ? That is a
compaxiitivenerms^ may periiiq^ s^y I have experimented on upwards of 3000.*-Yoa
have devoted a ig^eat dealicSf attention to the subject ? I have.—You have written on the
stibjeet ? I haYft.rr-I»;|^e ease of sadden .death ^an animal by person, what is the con-
dition of the blood after death ; is it^flnid or net ? . Very often, but not invariably by any
means : I do not think that is to be depended on. at aU ; it varies from the nature of the
poijson.— Does it apjMar in the case of sudden death of other cases? Yes.— Have yoa
attended to the evidence given yesterdaj^ as to the symptoms of Mr. Cook on the
Monday and Tuesday nights ? Yes, and the Sunday night.

Lord Caxfbell.^ — ^What do you assume the symptoms to have been on the Sunday
night ? A state of great excitement in a less severe form.— What symptoms do you
^'wune.to have been eaKhibJited oa the Sunday jpight ? That Mr, Cook described himseli
'"uive been very in.

* :^l5)SJ^i7tf6»i^;i«W^.-i'WHai ehe^ ^ TOhihre-Wen Itf* rtaieof Ifrtif excittbitent, tod in
a t!6tiditidn thutlfe eottfid^i^ Idni^elf msd for tiro mimit^.— 'You remember aUo what he
w&s sworn to l^rre ^tttted as 1b>what h^ imagined to be tlfe cause of the excitement ? I
wit!s i»boat to idtf'lSier^ hkd' been Motile' noise 'Itt Ae 8tKet~I7tyir-adr«rttng to the
^a y tti u toms 'degetfbed' tfii ihe$e^1ir^e=0cea8iotos here ih' court, is it yoar opinion &at they
xan H^e h^^n pvodnoed h^ifa^noSydn o^ttWehnia ? They do not r<^eia(ble what I hare
aeen to fcllttlr'it^wi!! Ttott' tttrte i(b *ihe' Cotirt itt what particular o^ particulars they
diffet; ffoto^^attlK^^ 6f iiitrjf^^ftfnia pdfsbni^^ haf b obseWed them on animals ? He
WmorfpiWAriifiW^^ ^ "' • • -

\:tx^fi\CAjlmf^—^h Xh^^^^^ riight?",You have no direct

eyidepce.^xcept 1^18 own gf what ine SjYmptoiii^ is a oiffere&t question; you

Are,spe^lD^nQV4)f tfcje^oj^qay and-Tue^ay nigl^^^ ;

, Mr. J^e^fo^ Sh^T^l speak. gq^eraJly : but toy X^ord asked yoa a question; you say
he liad more power of Voluntary motion than yqu ,haye observed. in animals under the
pm^<fUj t<^ yj^at particular, sxinptoms of ^he ^xi^t^nce of that power do you refer, in
m iI#i?Pt#'.fe^^? 9^ ^:'?>"?er d^y ? mij^^ ,up. in ^^-^^t pth^r? Moving
his hands about, freely swallowing, 4&d asking, t9 be rubbed, and n^ov^. — Does that
complete the symptoms that satisfy you there wfi a gre^t power of voluntary motion? I
belie'^'ii^.-^lh what olh«r particular do the symptoms of Mr. tJook, as slated by the
wSfe^ses,' v'ai^ ffom those you have observed? A sudden 6c6asion of .the convulsions
with'the'ttsttaTpfremonitory symptoms, and a greater lengih of tittle ^hi<^h occurred from
tfa^ tM:ii)$ of the pills supposed to contain strychnia, andth^ occasion of the symptoms,
is-^teucb'^eater 'than any p^od that has octiur^ed' in my 'ex|)erience.-^ there any
other particular in which the symptoms before death dSfrer? 'N^rne occttf 'to me at
p>w«kitv*^]>MB My obsepvatioii oeear to you on the 8Ct^amiiig?"/Fhe uiMsamig far&ka
the vomiting; I should mention, I have never seen an animal vomit i^er taking /
fltrfibnia * .'- '

' SiOfd' CATif PBfiLL.«>-Nbr scream ? Nor scream as ad eiqtressiop of voluntary' exercise.

** Mr. ffbrjeaht 8hee, — ^Is there any medical reason that occurs to yoh why the patient-
shotttd tiot vomit ? I apprehend where there is so much spasm there is an inability to
vomit'; in cases related where attempts to vomit have been made, they coold not
succeed ; I Have a case which is related in the tenth volume of the Journal de Pharmacie,
in which attempts wei:e made to give emetics without success. — In reference to the ' post>- »
moitem observation you have made on the bodies of animal^ poisoned ^by stryohma,
could you form any opinion from the post-mortem examination of Mr. Cook, whether/he
liad been under the influence of poison ?. They differ materially in the particulars I havo ,
mentioned. . ■ .

Lord CAMrBELL.-«In what particulars? The heart is stated to be emptji and.
nncontracted- . ' ^

Lord Campbeix.^-^I do not remember it being stated the heart was uncontraeted^ \
The Attomey-Generai.-^l rather think that follows, my Lord. ' ' '^' 1

• Lord -Cakpbeix. — ^I do not think that expression was made use ot / , , .)'.„{
The Attorney-General. — It would follow, that is, physically so. . ., , ,, .jx
Lord Campbeix. — Some of the witnesses said that 0e ^§mm coittwwtwig.t^ft fagyt

would spiU th^ bipod. .,,.;. • . ^rr

, The .i^<omsy«^0nera/.-^Your Loriship is right. It may ba either waj> (theysay* . i

Mr. Baron ALDitesoww-^I' faftve • got it here; the heart was quite 'contracteld, •aqd'^'

^oBti^ed BO blood; beings ihs i^salt of spaBmodie aotion. Tiiit is in Drw Harladd^ ^

«^deikce. • ' '■ .• «» '* • , .r

Mr. Serjeant JShee.—Does any other d!il^i«cee oectfrfo you afi ft> the appearance 'in.'
post-mortem examinations? The state of the Inngs, not eonfe^fe<«d.— Any other? ' Ther
Btate of the brain, not congested.-i-Any other ttal oecurtr to you?' No.-^There' is one
tjuestion I forgot to ask you in the eatOy patt^f the examinitioii < Ift the isase of the i
paroxysms of the animals on which youl!a^ee*perimented, ifliat Ifeas* been tKcJ course of -
•the subsidence, or the subsiding rathef , of the paroxysm f •-...».

Lord Campbell. — ^Where they have returned?

i *■ * '•! ^f ''lit

Mr, Seijeant /S^A««.— Ves. Gradually ,r-^Have you ^ver k»own the .case of a severe
paroxysm returned, and then a long interval of complete repos^e for several hours ?
JNot for severed hours ; I have stated ror half an hour.— Have you also experimented on
the bodies of animals poisoned by strychnia with -a vie"\*^ of discovering the strychnia
poisons, the body being in various states of fermentation and decomposition ? I have,
from a few hottrs up to the 43rd day, the body being perfectly putrid in the latter case. —

p

;222 XBUI« OF WILLUtf yjOMSR.

Hi0 it erer liti^ieped to jen in a case where you bad eerteia knowkd^ of ^mnr own that
^e amnuU ivaa kiHtd by stryebnia, to fail, within anT time within the limit yoa have
mentioned by the teats yoa lia>e applied, to discoTer the poiEoa f In no one case.— in
how many eases h^Te yoa experimented for that purpose f I conld not tay the whole
number. — ^Within a reasonable limit? In many eases: I think I faa^e down here some
of ikexBii thera were two women.t^Whea yoa say, in many cases, do yon mean 16,
20, 30, or whsKt ^ 16, perfaa^; I cannol say to a Ibw move or le86«*>Sappese a person to
have died oodef 'die immediate efieeta of stryehnia poison, in thetyrsl parafzysm after its
administration, and his stomach to hare been taken ool and put into a jar on the sixth
day after death ; in your opinion moat stry^inia haye b^n fMnd in ik» body on proper
chemical asfUjsis? If it wer^ th<ire*

Lord Camfbeix. — ^That is on the hypothesis that he died of it ? If I were to assoffle
that, I should say that,

Mr. Btrjetmt £'A«e.^~What tests would you use to detect the poison ? Extract it first
itom the other manen in which it is fixed to obtain it separate.

Lord Campbell,. — ^Describe what the test is. I should |^lace the contents in water
acidulated with acid ; boil fot a short time \ filter ; neutralize with an alkali ; dry it
with potash and lime ; evaporate ; and dissolve with spirit or with ether. — After evapor-
ating? After evaporating: I am stating the process which we did follow; evaporate
l3ie alcoholic extract to the consistency of a thick syrup, you then have the strych-
nia in a state to apply the test.

Mr. Serjectnt Shee, — ^What is the test? If it be common chemkal sjbryohnia, lofih
that is almost invariably found among medical ra«n and druggists^ oote test is aitric
acid : it i^ets a red colour, which in a great measure disappears on the additioa of
protochloride of tin : if the strychnia be there it does not undergo any chasi|(e on the
addition of the sulphuric acid ; but on the addition to this mixture of bichm)itt^ of
potash and several other substances It produces a beautiful purple which changes
through varying shades till it gets to be a dirty red : there are several tests, but that
is sumcient. — Adverting to the statement about putting the stomach in a jar : take it
that the stomach was put into the jar, brought up to London, and then immediately
submitted to examination : in your judgment was that in an unfavourable or &Toar-
• able condition for ascertaining, aye or no, whether the strychnia was there ? It wouW
give a little more trouble ; I do not see anything else. — It would not be in an UQ^'
vourable state for examination ? It would give more trouble, but not an unfavour-
able state otherwise.— Supposing four days later the liver, the spleen, and the kidae^rs
had been placed into another jar, sent up and forthwith examined, in your judgmeutif
the person' had died from stirchnia poison, ought it to have been discovered m those
parts of the system? Yes. — ^Have you, in the various experiments you have made on
the bodies of those animals killed by strychnia, have you discovered the poison in
corresponding portions of their systems ? I have seen it. — ^You have seen it done by
other chemical analysts? Yes. — You have detected Jit in the blcod? I have seen it
there. — ^When you saw it there, by whom did you see it done? Mr. Herap^th.— Is th^t
Mr. Herapath of Bristol who is here ? The same. — Is it your opinion that the apalya^
may be defeated or confused by the existence in the stomach of any other substance
Hviiieh would produce the same colours ? No. — Now supposing tJhe substances known bv
chemists as pyroxauthine and salacine were in the system or in the parts examinea,
would their existence there defeat the experiment ? Not at alL — Pyroxauthine ii not a
substance very likely to exist in the stomach of an animal unless put Iftiore qq purpose?
The most improbable substance ; it is <me of the rarest and aost dilfioolt substaaees to
be obtained. — What else would have to be done, in addition to what you have mentioned
ibr the detection of strychnia, to detect pyr^^anthine ? Not so muoh ; the difference
betweeu pyroxauthine and strychnia -is quite evident and distinct. — ^What would it be
necessary to do to detect the pyroxauthine ? Pyroxauthine changes to deep purple on
the addition of sulphuric acid alone, and on the additioa of bichromate of potash the
colour is spoilt, whereas in strychnia it produces i^ ch^Mig^ it requires the addition of
bichromate to change the colour ; I have the substance in my pocket — Supposing death
to have been caused by a dose of strychnia poison sufficient, but not more £an sumcien^
to destroy the animal, in your judgment would it be so decomposed by the process of
absorption as thajt you woiUd not be able to detect it by those l^stsin any portion of the
system? No.

Lord C4JCPB£L]:«.r-That would be what id called a inimi'P'y^T\ dose ; enough^ and so
more*

ytr. SeKfeani Shee,f^ThsL\f I believe, is the hypothesis ^ey put; bar that queitioB

EIGHTH DAT, Hat ^2, 1S58. 2&3

been; pretioniAj to tbii trail, « nuitter of ooosideratiMt with ytm^ ltd iaown to you to
be a q«Mt»ni ymk some toxioologists f It has.

Lord CiMPBEiA* — ^It is a question on which toxioologuiti hsrs entertained a diflferent
o^ioo ? I believe they have.

Mr. Secant >S'A<je.— Have yon studied the question sufficiently to be able to state to
my Lord and the jary reasons for thinking the minimum dose, after having done its
work, continues in die system ? The reasons that are sufllcient to my mind.— Will yvu
state what those reasons ane ? I believe the illustration given was that, as food undergoes
a change on being taken into the body, these substances also do.

remain unchanged in the blood ; these substances are absorbed without digestion, these
alkaloids, and may be obtained unchanged Jrom thii blood, out .th^e substances may be
administered in various ways.

Mr. Serjeant Shee,n-ln your judgment will any amoaat of poirefactioofL praveat .the
discovery of the strychnia ? No, not within reasonable bounds.

Mr. Ba&qn Auaerbonw — ^Yoa have fooad it after 43 days? To eay that ttrfefeMa is
absolutely indestructiMe would be wrong, but withun ordinary bomtds Btryohnxa i» a
fixed substance ; I have found it after 43 daysw

Mr. Seffeant Bhee, — Can you give as any opinion as to ^ probable of the rclatirve
rapidity of ike action of strychnia on an em]pty or a full stomach f The more empty,
i^ qmeker the aetion.

Crosft-caamined by the AttGrney^Genaeul,

Voiit I thinik, Mr. Knmieley, are the Lecturer on Surgery at the Sehool at Leeds ?
TeSbr-^Mif. Moi^ey is the I^eturer on Chemistry ? Yes.— That is the gentleman whom
we oaUed for the prosecution ? Tlie same«-^The experiments on those sixty aniaials you.
spoke of, were they made bv Mr. Morley and you joiotly ? Part of them. — ^The greater
part? No ; perhaps half of them mi^t. — ^Was there anything to distinguish from what
3roB eapeiimented on alone or from what yon experimented with him, or may we take it
the general result was the seme ? The general result was the same.—Since when have
ywa commenoed that series of experiments on sixty animals ? It has been spread over
St period of thirty years.-^But I mean the experiments you have made wifth Mr. Morley?
Since the case that has been so frequently referred to, the greater part of them ; a part
of them was made beibre that, whh whidi Mr. Morley had nothmg to do.^-Was that
wkh reference to this caee ? With refbrenee to a case which was spoken of a ^reat
mamber were made coajoiutly. — I m«aa before that tine ? Before and sinee.-^Were
tfaey made with refbrence to this case ? Some of them w«re, others o^rtsdnly not.— Row
aaasy have yon made wifbh reference to this ease ? That would be difficult to say ; t was
cmgaged in that ctse, and a great many of those experiments were made with reference
to that oaes;«^Do set qmnrel with me, bat answer me : how maay experiments have
yoa made with reference to this particular ease ? 1 cannot answer the question.

Lord CampseIx. — Can you gire us any idea ? I have made a few, but the great bulk
certainly not.

The Attorney-General,^— Vfhen were yon first concerned in this case ?— About the period
of the death of the person who has been so frequently alluded to. — Were you applied to
on that ? I was in correspondence with Mr. Smith, I was applied to. — ^Did you begin
the correspondence or did Mf . Smith, the attorney for the defence, commence it ? I be-
lieve I wrote a letter. — How did it be^o, did he write to you ? I believe it began in
this way, that the published, case of which I read the details waus forwarded to Mr.
Smith.— With a view I presume to your being engaged ? I cjalled his attention to it.

Lord CaHPBSX.L. — ^Which case ? The first case.

The Attorfkeif^^Qei»er^jt^li\ii^ ease we have agreed to consider an anonymous case ;
BOW aUeadf tW ease, the ease of whieh we do not give the name, had not then
ooeatred ? That I eamiei be sure of. — Ton have not told us one thing that may be ma-
terial ; in these various experiments that you have made, what has been the general dose
yon have given? From half a grain to two grains.— Have you found half. a grain suffi-
cient to destroy life in the larger animals on which you have experimented r Yesj I
have seen a dog and a cat die ^rom half a ^rain, Aoi always. — You mentioned some
animals were more susceptible than others ? Yes. — ts that intended to apply to animals
of difiPerent species, or do you find a varying degree of susceptibility in the same species ?
It applies to both \ some animals as to species are more susceptible tban an indiTidual of

V 2

224 TRIAL OF. WILLIAM PALMER,

the same peeled ; some yrete nacaft siisM^ible tlum oth6fs,> tMt lAufre i^ a'gveftt'ditPettenoe

between the species. — ^You mentioned thatthi; symptoihtf have -^eiien^j fthbwn tkMi-

selves in from two to thirty minntefi ; Mr. Morley told ns two mintftei to ati hotrr, iHIl

you undertake to say that there have not been cases in wbidi the first appearanoes Ikare

not been delayed an hoar? I do.— You say th^re have not been? Yes; that I hare

seen. — Have you not known instances in Which you have had to repeat the doses of

poison ? When the dose has not been snfiieient to kill, f>\it to produce symptoms, there

18 a wide difference, I have given it three times ; the quantity i ^ve was halt a grain.—

Was that to a cat? Yes. — I think your periods -wete' yl minutes past five, I am

giving you this from a note I have received ; the periods at which you gave the three

doses were 34 minutes past 5,-10 minutes past 6^ 35 minutes past 6 ;. makitg on the

whole two grains ? It is very probable ; I cannot be sure irhether it was so or sot^As

far as you can reMilect? I thidk it is very probable; there is no statement that

symptoms were not shown. — ^Were there any symptoms shown? Certainly.— What

symptoms ? Ilie symptoms of spasms, bnt the atrimal did not die, and I had to repeat

the dose. — I am merely putting that to you as a fhct in the case, you were dealing with

an animal of- the same spedes, of 'odher individuals of which you had been able to

produce death with half -a grain ? I will eitplain it to you at once. — IMd the cat swallow

those doses ? No, it did not-^Harveyon found other animals olfected by it ? i ■ think I

have young ones, not oid>onea.-^Have you any doubt of it? Yes, old ones Ilmve.^

May I take it^ that with cats in general half a grain is the^nrinimnm doso?' Yes;- 1

think hidf a '^ann would be a small dose to kill an old strong cat in the sofid' fit8ke.^A

small dose will suffice in the fluid ? I am not sure, it is probable ; bat i^am sptekiag

now from my own experience. — Is it your experience that when given in dte finid tttrte

a small dose does ? I have stated that already. — ^That is so, I may assume that? Yoa

may assume that. — A word or two about the symptoms; if I understood yoo, hard

breathing It among the first symptoms that show themselves ? Yes ; thes comes t)#itoh-

ing, an inducement to move^ — Then I think you say some slavering of the!m<mth?

Generally. — ^Then comes twitching? Yes ; and then trembling of the muscies,' and thai

usually convulsions. — What I want to know is, whether these syiripta ms mafci flafe

appearance uniformly in all animals of the same species, or whether there isidtvtsnityin

the uniformity in which they proceed themselves and in the <M^er? I wonld-Jiat swear

that they may not occur; but such is the result of my observations.-*- What I want to

■know is, whether the result of your observations is that these symptoms Vhieb yoa have

so described oeeur uniformly, or at uniform periods of time, or whether ^ey vary oeoa-

sionally ? They oertainly do not oecur at nnifonn periods of tii6e.-^They vary in

.order? In deseibin^ them, I would not say there lare not exeeptioasi — ^Do not yoa

know there* are considerable variations in the order,- as well asintiietime? I have

HOC observed considerable variation- -in the order, I'faarire in the time. •^^ Not,

'With regard to the reoorrence of these -conTulsieos,. when- the oon'Sttlsions harre once

. set in have yob fbtmd oonsiderable dif^ence as^to.^w perifodsat whkh' these cQiiviil8i<i|^

tak« plaoe? Somte differedcet with greater or leas intetTals^*^Hsve you not also fiw

M^onsideraA>le yari^y in this, that an animal will undergo a socbesaiea ef these aifctaeks be-

^fore it dies, alnd that another wiH die after a mneh. less amiouhti of -eonivulsion? Yes, it

Beldbm dies after one, generally four or H^Cy and often h gr^t many more. I have known

ihe or two instances in which the animals hate died aftei' one convulsion. — Has that been

whei'e the death has followed from a dose equal in quantity' to some other quantity which

"^has not produced the same effect ? Yes. — Now as re^rds the convulsions of the aiffiH«nt

muscles* of the'body, does that also vary<-!^e ordeir in which the museles are convalsed?

"^ sothe extent it does iik violence.**— Hbive you foimd tha^ sometimes the muscles of the

trunk are affeotM before those of the extremities, and sometimes the muscles of the ex-

iii^tied befofe tho^e of the trbnk ? I think tfaer limbs are genemlly affected first, tbattf

*thegenier*l ruld,-^very often both togtlther.*^ Where they are simultaneous, tiiesymptoins

^df thd' eitfettiltiw gene^allyi precede P fphb differeilce is^ this, that they may be more

€^ily Ob^rVed i^ the m(nscie8>of «be<trtinlDP^Ifhe eonrvihtkms I am' spedcing of? The

eonvoMOM oebur 'tbg^her, gener^ly ttgethenM-With regard to the fiaeoidity that joa

'have Akeiftitmed A^ioecuHring after deathiihav^tyciu iknowti any instance in which rigiditr

Ai^ter'thari Wdhe^if>AhiiK>tiiraffy rigor iaortiMiihnB oooorred after-death? I do notthitK

'Thbrblsany^^flferidneei''' ''I'l' "■!») -t k^-i i ) i ./< i\ -■ ,■ .

Lord CAMpi5E5tt'.i^Ih no 'oiie 'instato^fe! ?"'l' have faio^n instance* in whfch they "^^^
very rigid, but 1 hlsive known 5n*tanti^^ in'whic!r the muscles were flaccid. I ^^X *^*®
I do not think' there is ah;^ pe6ttrrilt rigidity ptt)du^ed by strychnia.

The Attomeif-Generat.^lt ilioX l^e not So yi th'^ animals, how wad it lathe' t^eo instances

where you found death from slrycnnia'lii the human subject ? I mentiofiM consideraWy

^ — With regard to the lady whose case we do not name, was it not the fact, then, that

EIGHTH DAY, Mat 22, 1856. 225

«

although th« muscles of the body were flexible, that the hands vere curved and the feet
9reh^ifW^mfW^^^Wf^l9fi*^^ Notmoreithaa is usu»l ttota ordinary causes ; I have
said:the;Jbiin4|^fr/eirA curved aodi the feet arched by nuscular oontraction.i— Do you mean
that wj^n i$ou- sfK^Re-of the feet being decidedly aj;Ghed» do you mean to say that you
meimtno mior#' t£m i$ due tiOi the ordinary rigidity of 4eath 9 I do; that is what I mean
l^ mosovdar cpntraolUoB.-r-Is tli^t what you meant when you signed this, " the hands
were iacanved« a|id the ieeit dieiiQidedly sprqhed by muscular contraction " do you mean to
say that yqu meant .A^^ore.thai^ is ^e. to the ordinary rigidity of death ? I do, and
stated so at the.timiShr-Ip Xhe treporlt you have, signed? No ; in conversation with the
parties ^)^^gaged^^Y•o«k.l^a4^ a report whlahrdid not include the whole ? It is a state-
meat of a fact* '

' Locd CjacPBfiiJ*.*^Yon say, ** I meant to describe the common tyor mortis ?" Yes ; it
is stilted in tbe^bnoer part' of the report that tiie odier muscles of the body were less so ;
lint tiiere wasa distmction between the two portions of the body ; a statement of the fact, but
Ddtitingihone. < . . ,

The Mkumiy^QtneraL^-^'bfcm^ Mr.Morley Btaitedhere the other day that in the experi-
ments he made with you on animals killed by the poison, that after death there was an in-
terval of flaxxodity, aher this rigid&ty commenced, more than if it had been occasioned by
the nsiiail ri^ morUs : yea do aotagree with him astd the statentedt of the fact ? — I do not ;
itris adifferenceof opinimieotirely.-^Now you say you had genetally found the heart full ?
Yes^ tke right side. — ^Ddes the &ct of the heart having^ been found empty in this case lead
yoGb to the ^Hmdnsion that it was not a death by 8try<;h&ia poison ? Amongst other thiiigs.
— ^Did^yoa hear fbe evidenoef given hene the other day of the post-mortem ? I did : I also '
hsand j&ia stated, '* that the heart was distended and empty :" I believe I was in court
ivben the gentleman who condueled it gave his evidence of the post-mortem, examination
of' Mrs* Smyth,- who 416(1, from the unfortunate administration of strychnia : if he stated
that the heart was oongiasted I ^euld have heard him.-^In those two crises does the fact
«f the heart having been ^nd empty exercise ai^ influence on yeur judgment ? Not
unless I know how the pa6t-«Qortem was made; if the post*mortem was commenced In
the head, theexphmation is given by Mr. Morley and myself in the case at Leeds : we
had se doubt 'ot -the heart being fuli, ^e blood being fluids bat ih% head beinff first
epetied, the large* vess^ out, the consequence was that the blood by mere naturalphy-
sieid oauses deains away. — ^Are you aware how the post-mortem was made in this particu-
lar case of Mr. Cook ? The chest and abdomen were opened before the head ; it is
staled 80.^-What efieet would that have ? If there were blood in the heart it oi^ht to
be there. — That would not make the difference ; the head was not opened there in the
first instance ? No, that is my explanation of it. — ^What would occasion, in your
opinion, the contraetimx -of the heart 'in Mr. Cook's case ? The heart, if empty, is usually
oontracted} it is- like other muscles. — How do you account for the' emptiness and its
being contracted? If it be empty it will have 'nothing to open its contraction ; I cannot
account,, fpom-' the appearanoes of the body afber death, for the emptiness of the heart
any more thaa' it might be the usual effect of death.— Of what ? Of death : it varies
viery much, but a» a- gekieral rule in post^-mortem examinations We find, if the heart is
empty^ it is conttacted }- the heart is a'Cifcular sack-like muscle, and if it has nothing to
extend it it oontmets.^^I believe -you say in all -cases you have examined of strychnia
poisoii the blood is fluid {)• No, I do not.— In' how many ? In a great majority. — Then,
soppose tfatore is hleod in the heart, wduld the heart have contracted? No, it would he
flahby.^^If you find the heart contracted, ihe heart must be empty ? There is a differ-
ence: between the two cavities of the Ireart ;' it s<Anetime(i happens the left ventricle of
the heart is contKaeted and Ihe right flabby and uncontracted ; it is very often spoken of -^
Wlmre there is death by asptyiAtk that Is so ? Ptfecisely.— If I understand you, the.post-
moctem appeanmces of Oook*» hody, whidhyou say differ materially from those you have
seenafler death £rom strychnia, wete the emptiness of the heart, the state of the lungs.
Bad the want et eottgesti(m> in the bnunt now, I have asked you as to the emptiness of
the heart, whatdo you say as to the ettit^ ofnhe lungs ? The lungs are described as not
being congested.-^-Bo ybuattaishany im^rtanee to the-emphacine ? It is of ^wo kinds.
— «\^nuit is the dietieetion between the two?* One df them consists in a dilatation of the
cells, the other in a. rupture by which the- air, not being in the cells, passes amount
them. — I sdppose you say it was not from the rupture of the cells here ?. That I in-
ferred from -file description given. — ^Have you not found emphacine in cases of animals
that have died ? Yes. — ^Has it always been from a rupture of. the cells ? Always : it
could be in no other way. — ^What is there in the statement of witnesses which makes you
think there was emphacine of the other sort ? We are tol^ that there was during life a
diseased conditiou of the lungg. — I am spiking of the appearance of the lungs after
death? I must put the whole together.-^Would it not have been an easjr thing Id hav^

20a '^^(^^^ ^ wobLUM Pixmat

iMcertatned wk»t the ofaaxaeter of ihis «BiphaeRie vas? w« 'hftd'the vitoMsis hrte w^'
laade the po^t^nKurtem ex«a»iiuUMm: wiwkL U not hara betatdeakaMd to ha'«a .kfiown
irbetber the nature of thU empbaeine w«s BaturaJly orivhalfaar it wai^eufhama-lbrai
rupture ? If the queatlon had been pat to the«i»^-T-*.^ — ^Bul yoa w^re afaitiag )||iei« advis^
iM mj frienda throug^hout, wbila Dr. Harla^d was hare, aiod ytm keavdn^aA' ^ said?
I djd hear him.^ — 0id it ocour to yon it vat^proper ^o aak him wlMt'^asitiia^nfAafe at
tbp«e? No, I did Bot, boeanse I heard (whioh irat auiioieiit to my onod^ thM disease
had. eaifited : tb« oujeation waa pji^ as to ihe.diwasis «a Dr< Savage.-^ an spcafcing of
Ithis (onphaclne ? It did not o^^cnr to.nie.-TXiet vie wtk yo« thia : ya«h«te told us the
-various j^^mptoma ahoat tbis'gentlcsman, firom whi^h yau gather thaa bewaa^f a delieate
constitution ; to which do you ascribe these convulsions of vhich he died ? Not to say.
-^I tJiQught I understood yo« to fay that iiud £»6tiof his haTtag lyphilia waaaninkpor*
taut ingredient iu your mind ? Yes, but you ask for ooDv«lsioQ&r~X aw yh ead y«a hivt
no doubt he died of convul&ions ? No^— You enteiod ialia a long dAlail atf the vaneas
ailments under which this unfortunate man suffered, and yon say that this w*aaM:^Mdb<'
pose him to couTulsioa^: I a^k yowi which oi^- tliaai ? Tha whola; the oMnhinatNo of
thesDu — ^Amon^t others you motioned ^j^^temeAt f Yet, and depteaeaMkadT afMs/^
What evidence is there, pn wixiph you rej.y, Oif .his he«a^ a »a» aiilueci to 6aptmkm(£
^irits ? That he was thr^e minutes aftar the winninf* of thetaee by hia hone ia;^ wlueh'
he could not speak.— Is ther^e a^y othw: incident in th« laan'a life a«.wlMi yiMLcaa pni'
your fin^er^ and, say tl^t Jt^ei was aubjeet to dejp^resaion. of .apirita? It ia atated by Mri
Jones tSa,i he was subject tP denresiuoa of fSpint% — ^What aoit. of dqNrflssai«? Bfeaiii
depression. — Wh^e dp jpfi. j^d any mental depaeana* at Roeel^^ Thrnvtis
good deal of me^^l depression. — Would you expeet otcitement to prodnaa ila^iwfei-
recently on. its e^te^. or after it was totally and entity, ^ene? JA auiy iodwitf
that state of brain in. which convulaion will follow at sobm distagwa.-— tlHd yoaind
from th^ eviden^^e.that th^ brain was perlectly k^ealthy ? No, aot peafeatiir hcakbyw^
Di^ you think ihegantlemea.who made the post-aacMrtom iwaiRiaatioa -vouMdaat kave
foiuid it? H^' Bamford said it waa nat.-T^Di» yoa mean, aa agauaat tiM npaiAed toA*
aoiopy, and, w testimony here of Dr« Hariaod and of I>r. MonekiaR, aa .vaU asi^*
I}eYoosh)re;^4<^ you miean* as against thei«, ta aet up tba ttotiiaoagr tOif thei «U

fentleman, Mr. Bamford? The evidence stat^ at tl»e inquMt kidbf ia pat-ia;,^
Repositions. — Do ^ou mean ■ to say in your opinion that axeiteiiie»t pradkaciDg
dgufease of the brain would bring on these convulsions : npoa your oath^ do yon
mean to make that representation? I mean to say this; that ia the cooditiaa
of the braii}> and the statement that has beea aftada» I believe it to be quite
probable that convulsions might come on and. destroy a pecsotn, and. leave
m> trace behiud,--Do you believe this^ man .died of apt^lexy? I do not;
you must bear, in mind he had taken dos^s of morphia. — Do you aaeribe
bJOs death to xnorphia ? No, except that it wonld assist in the coavulsiw
attack, and it would affect the spinal marrow. — ^Brought aboat bj^e morphia? 1^^
-<«^In yonr opinion was m<»rphia right treatmeirt' or wroai^? I ahoald think not veiy
good in the state ia which he was. — What state ? In thfe state he was in then.— What
afAta do you mjean? ^xeitement/^Do you mean t& atate^ therawaateaecitemeat at
liagel^ : do yon mean to aay that there haa been anything adid to Aiow ihai tliafa waaaay
e^t«mentat Hugeley? ion will not allow me to^ furaaih aft'aavpe^; tlietewssas
^itt^paeut «t ,Kuffaley ; but morphia, when tht^a^i^ aieknei»» will'aaaetiaB8s dingM^
-vijlth 1^ patiant wLen there ia an irritable state qf the hraita^-^here "ta the evideoee of
t^incital^e ^te of the brain: the stomach nra&>irritaaod, IwiU allow -9 JMit^hersi*
l4e evidence that there waa any esoitament at RttgcAagrrl^^ant tat^kainp? Theieii'
Tgm^.-^lhw w^ was«morphia a wroo^ttreattaseaa^ Boeaaaa it » after ai<toeiaf'>aad'
therta is.eyidfvaae of thene beings an irritable stata^of >thar htahi^ fiooaa whait' ii»said'haa*
a^lfy h# muai hai^e eithier been delirieiia on tha SiindiP^ nighty or he arait h««ia had SOSes'
ali^k.simiJAi' to ^hat he had on the Mondair oight>*T>C& you baliovo^ an j««tfli]3fn)a-
x)Mh,/that,'h« h9^ ftonvulsions on the Siiflud^'tha:ipMBe'aa hehadoatba-lli»ada|y9 i'
cAPJAol sftiii— ^ jym heliavo ha had? No».I do ■at.-^^o'yoa bdaeva ha had; not? }^
I do «^»jlrT-I>^.yau.JX]«ea» ^ reprasaatv ia youv hpiaSon, th« >alta«^ of tha S«aday asjp*
ifaa Alomar tp the attM^k on. the Monday .aight'!^ Laaainteneityf bat, I thtakrverf^
bi^y of the aam0>^))lMVi'C,toc*^^You do <be]aev8> there wofo tfowmlalaiia oa the San^'
th«a ? No, I dO; n^<r-r&e.cyM of .ooa^vulaiaoa, jem kmm 3 Ho died 'U tonvMo'^* bm,
I ^y of tha sam# chavaa^.n-rThaa you* -do : heUevo ka had edavojsiains t lb a ccrtu*'
o^tenlv but lasain.iat^nsi^; •th«sra.wo6 a. states bf gveait meatal and bodily o«eileneat»«*^
Qn the Monday night ?. . I have ^stated to ^oq that ho was in* that coBditie& whiatrvety
often precedes coavulsioDs.-^Wiil yoii^ a^mia of a ann.' so under the infloettce oi '^^'Tr^
aijui he is soddenJiy di«t«irh«d by? a«o»a| it^iaiifcely to>a(Tii aidapraiiingalbot Vfoa. Mtt'

I wUl $ tea ^Mr» irii no jA'Oof (kT a neite.^^n^fefe lA) ff^xtf, ^bepl His oim stflteteentr bf*
aB7<iUBei»9 <t Preoiseljr; tkftt is'^urt of m^ opinioo, that he did not state iif\aX hod-
ocdairdl' a fmwt ely .-- Pd 7^ Mean to Miy 'thai he did not' stater that truly ? No ; that
h«iraa ariitidtitDt that is one t>f the syniytibna^ I bellev\fethe ttan to faa?ebeel^d^Fknia
th«ai«-«No1ri«fiir,b« ^ food- as to Ml Hike irf^at dre tiio^e ibrtns of conndaiotis of idricli
yau ga^ dMMe atatomooft' to ittf irisad wiiieii 'wlllr .produce eannmlsioiitf of a tetanic
fena? Any ixtfitatioo will proda<$e it.--EodiDg in death ? It may end in death.— Did
ym e'vev se«aB>iAttanee ? ' Y«t,te ehilibvn.^^1 am not speaking ofehlldren ; what oon-
vii]fti«u ai^ titeve whieh are attended with tetanifonn symtKoms? Any conTtlsions, if
by tetai^fom y<Mi matii an o<itt«litet(shii% of theli4a'(M.>'-4¥ill voa teU me tjf any c6b^
^^ilsioos wkioh you hare hnowv «iid In deAth- aeeom|)anied -#ith what my friend eallr
tetaaifo-i^|^t<Rns>? <lhinKe known* them in ekildiSni.^~Wo are deaUnq^ with a iban
tweaty^rgltt yMaaief age^ he had'not worms in hhl stomach, or anything of that Idndr
ia what i&Mance ha«« you kaown saeh fbrnls of eonviilsioiis prddnce death in an adnit?
1^ faa«« iMrrep Ittdluek a eaio.*^Haeyoar reading famished you with any ? The general
statomeni of 9M. waiters is^ that- such casea dO' otear.^^Is there nothing that wiU furnish
yoa'Wid) a ftaaiffr for it ? No,; etcept eonniMioASy oonvulsiire disease9.*-^Have yon ever
laowaor iiead< of a case m which the patieait w^cottseions td the hi^t t 1^» I haTe not ;
I hare saen it stated 8o» hot I hava- never met with |t.-^r tiike it^ in epHepsy you ha^a
those taiaiiic tymptoaasP Yes<**^Bat ia epilepsy, before d<tetfa, eoascidMnefls is gone?
Yes; so far as my experiobCe goesy^Yoa ila-ve had oonsidentMe epfperience'in tetanus;.
we will pass on to>tetaaas : you hare had (skmsideraUe oxipeHence in ididpatliic tetanus r
(have lad fdor caaesodTidiopallrio tetanas, ttidaom^'five ^ she peiha]|i^ of tranmatte.-^'
Be to good aa to attend to what I an aihout to^readtoyou^ wh$ch is the iMiatement of Mr«
Joaea as to the symptoms under which Mr. Cocflk suffek^ en 'the cdnniig on of
the paroxysm? {The learmd €l<nm96l read <m eHxttact frotn the ^ticUAoe ijf Mr, JdnesJ)
That is net tetanas at all ; I do not think, it' is' tetanus.-^ ilsk you to di^titt^ish it in
«9 one pai^alar? Let me ele&riy ixndersland the questiofa.'^I 'have' read t6 yon t&e'
dsMriptioB of Co<dL's symptoms as witnessed by Mr. Jonei : t ask ybtt to pdiixt out any
dis^aetion between those syn^toms and the symptoms of tetantA? Do yon mean the^
«a« plwoxyam ^ the disease whieh isealled tetamts ^*^I am speaking of ike parbkysnt^
•o^tetanas? Itis vfery like. " '

LordOiLim^x..'— Yonsay thisisnotletatfas atall? It1sii<)t. .J

The Attotney-General'-^l want you to point out any distinction wl^ich acCompanieo^
paroxysms, and distinguish it from real tetanus? I do tot know that jjiere is any dis^.
tindtion except— -I was about to say I never saw a case of tetanus in wmch the rigidity^,
-continued at the timb of death and afterwards. — ^I am asking you as to symptoms of th^
paroxysins; I understahd you to say the symptoms of the paroxysms are no^ distinguishi^,
Able from dibse of tetanus ? Some of them are at the moment of death.— <>ive n^e any^
oflliem? : . .1 «. . . ..rs.

Lord Campbblu— -This is not tetanus; but, as far as tljey go, they oooncide .witi tie
symptoms of tet^i^us at tte moinpnt of deatji? Yes- , .. . ..;..;v

The Attomey'GsneraL^^Ohs&Tv^ you have here consciousness to the last; that befbre
the man dies he says ** Turn me over;" and as soon as they tarn him over h4 dies / tell^
me of any^MMie yea know of in whioh death has enmed iVom <A>nvulsions, wher^^heid^ath
was not from tetanus, in which the patient was twnasioos ? I have alveady Miid Id^WSii^
kDow> ofsaeta acaSe.>^Now let me eaH your atleation te stryehinatetaniurt tMoi^ ydtf"
«all the isymptoois tetanio? They (are calledso- very propeely.-^Doyov agree with sy>'
£ei^flmin Bradta,.that 'te^symptemSiiin'tbr eoimilsiions'arisittg under sirydinid are ityr
the same ^laraeter while theyiasti ^ the eynptems m tra»Ba(ie'er idnepatdkle tetsaus, atf*
that the distiudtioa between the twoisonsiflts m tthe leoufse im which the vyttoptoms rrnvr
Will you repeat the question ?--While the p«rQixysme>ef tetanie ciMi^ttlSiea» la«ti'th«Ar6t|«<
nodiffereiiee between tk>se'Whtoharise.fn)m^stry«hnitt and tho4ew4iUhtii4«crfrom!telkittil^
mpeTJ^ae called; butthedi^renceisin theoaurse'tfftfaem^ -I'tbitik <?hetw4si<>^Wliatt
IS Ae dii&renoe ? I think that the heads>Areiesir^ti<)AeBtly cefiitmeted dad aifecled4a^
oKLiaarytBtaiiasi. and that thsiw.iioIeiQffeet«ef sha'spasntsisieflS'iii'osdiilairy tetanNiS^
Yon wonldez^eet.to find, the 'haads mtoreijfirral]^ and tij^Miky >eleited lb tetatM^freiOr
stryohaia Aanin onUnary ietaatos? I dtiaic it ^is ao.-^Ia othc^ rai(ieetfft<idD yoa agi^
with SkBeniaaun.BNdae^:&at the diiereiioctiBil m th«« conise'ltt wiMeb t^ symp iertrt '
ran 7 Therd ismother dsffer^stee, that in'oodinary tetantts the ebt^oU^oaa netierehticety-
pass Sway.^-That is> one of iImi roBSoaa het^vc foF distiugtiii^ag «he'e««rse9- Iv thd
case <at Leeds dt was- the^ saBse.^-^ believe^ from' your >laTge ' ohiervaiiba' of -.the sytaplema
<4 llritskaiai jom. d<At pesfeelly prepan^ in that> ^sb> -t^ L^^ds, ^tiM^-Hattie «f ^wMcih We d»
•et^gllla^^iB tkeillittMcivlioii d£.tha^SQ^ptODd^^)coiae»tO't^ deteittiiaatyoii'tiibt thatf

238 Tfif AL ^OF WILLIAH PAtilf &&

ft desth from stryehnhi ? I lOMtight it pcMsiUe «xid probab1i» ^ I' ^^ >^o* ttoztiei t<y« deftf-
mined opinion. — ^Ton expressed an opinicm f I did.^-«Wd yod ncrt say' ydtt had ii6id<)aH
as to the cause of death? N6, I said I thought it probable'; that irlis 'After tie post-
mortem. — ^I am speaking now of irhat you said of the' symptoms, and in th« descHption
of the symptoms yon gare that opinion? 1 think I said that iraS ^e ooiichifiidn I 6ww
from the symptoms and the post*mortem appearanliee^:— >-Ybn IkkA nfttut 'that tim6 ascer-
tained that there was stiycnnia? Yes, 'we had. — Let' me* ask* yOn whetliefr this is yotrr
Tiew of the symptoms of strychnia; as distingufsbed'^m the sym^totaiM^ of ordinary
tetanns. (Th« learned Counsel read a pdrtkn of the tep&rt^vfMnJftinnsle^'in t^ Liedt ease.)
Did you state that on the description of the syihptefMS'gHe* by Sfitt. Withstm, the same
witness who was examined' here the other day, 'tlialt wasyour'^pAiiiMi? I said^thst.—
I ask you wiiether it is possible, afMr that; that yon ean rtepresenlf he^'<^I^ tiM ktKhr
whether yon intend to do so) thart this was ft cast? of tdiopathie tetatttef I never did,
and you have not heard fi*om me that I infer '«hat.--^I h^e he&rd it nsdd in ttai&
case, that this may have' been sometMng arinng fh)ni a syphittt^c affection ?
Idiopathic or traumatic tetanus was mentioned; I do not think ft was a esse
of tetanus in any sense of the word. — ^Why not? I ha*^ gi^en the ^desctipfion ;
because it differed Arom th« course of tetanus.-— Bid it dif^ frdm theciMitfie of
tetanus from strychnia ? In 'the particulars I hare already deeci^bM^-^ltepittt them
once more? The very sudden acquisition.— Acquisition of what?' AcqmBitSon of
the convulsions. — After what? After th« first rousing of Mr. Joned.— What else?
His 'power of talking.^Did you not know that in the instance of Mrt. Swyth she
talked, and begged to hav« Water thsrown on her, and tttlked thronghouf? It did not
occur to me. — ^Are- yon Judging of the one inci<kntal case, and coming herewith
conclusions ift)und€ld on that? I think it is an element; the time. — ^Then let » me add
the element that the lady, whose paiAful case has been given here, continues tothe fest
conscious, and-asksto have her legs stretched just before she died ; does that Shake your
ffcdth ? Yes.— Do you not know in that case that her last words were to tnrti hdt over?
There was ^something said about what the words were.—- Do not you know that the
faut was the liidy asked to be turned over? Not at the last moment ; I do not dispute
it if it is said so. — Were there not here the premonitory symptoms ; the animals are
affected about the jaws and the ears, and Mr. Cook has stiffness in his neck, and Bsks
to have it rubbed ? It is a premonitory symptCMn. — ^Was it not a symptom ofl the con-

. vnlsions which are not distinguishable from tetanus ? I have said so.-^-I want to know

• wiiat you said to, me ? I have stated here, that I believe in eases of poison from
stcychnia it is &8t developed in the legs and feet. — You told us the anunals began
to fed twitching in the ears ; this gentleman had, before the convulsions oame on^
stiffness in the muscles of the neck and jaw, anid begged to^ haive them rabbet?
That might be if it were anything else. — I ask you now, is not difficulty of breathing
one of the premonitory symptoms ; he sat up in bed, and complained of feeling suf-
focated? Yes.— And felt a stiffness about the neck, 'and asked to have it rubbed; I
«flfc ydu what' were those but premonitory symptoms ; he askAd ttohave it rdbbed, and, as
(Bir as we know, in all the animals : the animals coidd not ask to have it rubbed ?

'^ ^^ . ■ Mr. Sirjeant 8hce objected to this mode of putting ihe quesiidh.

J .. Jf^/i^s^.—jlu no one single insl^nce conld th(» animal bear to be touched, a,nd it evi-
dently was most painful to it to be touched. . , , ,. (
j,J^j^<nJiey'GeMraL-^I)o not you knpw tl^at Mrs. Sinytb asked to have her W
una arms straightened? I do. — Let me ksk you this ; hiave you not often found that it
' • ■ ■ '^ - ' ' -^ - ' -^ ■ - No; I

^11 cases ?

, when she

;<j6idd8ii6ik,she bej^ed 6f -ttifem not to -tbti'ch hfer.— Did ihe ^aot ask to We her legs

tttbbM? That Wks-Whett the rittixjft Vai^'IsiightVljot during the fatal attack.— After

"thep^rox^fcm ? The itoijn^s^liad tietfri.^After'tbe paroxysms had set in, did she

'notreq^kt to bte'tbbbedf ' Shtj di'd b^fAreth'e 6onvnUion^ came on; she liked to have

migkt not be toucSied.— Buffer fthit 'toe* ihfipfc' that the paroxysms came on so ^"
after the flnrt prenloMtdry Symp^M, itj '^here ' dtie sin^e point in which this differ*
from strychnia tettfritis? The pbwerof swsdloWing s<^ laitely.— On what does it »^
pend, the inability toswuilcyw? '"PMmvhtef'inaliility to> movethet jaw.-^B*^ ^^Xl
stated that the locb-jarw is.dn Ihesen eases the dast: symptom that comes^on?i' *°^
i^mptoms had come on.— What symptoms? The sy^nptoms of«onwikioBi.-*»I«* ^

wMiuttitiBtit^ot.fk ^t ^UKti.as wdU^ aa i]|,D»tiuiU».«etmii«^ in titMuu-from atiycAaiia
^Qokrrjaw P» faoti tiio ifistr^mpteni, and verj «ftea nayer. leta m at ail ?~rl liava iie?ar
aeen an in^taoaa iA< wlu^b. it doea tsot . nake ita a{ipearaiiQe»-^Ia it the. last? I
atAted so th«n }. |wj^ ia my ejcperim^la I kvre^ Bavar U^aa ^ble. to. see aayttuag; I
.4o not deny that it loajr, hut X, an^ speaking of the , general rule ; I think it ia
quite possible it ]nay»T-*At ^bat stage. di4;^t Qoo»e pa? Very early; more thaa tw<y
liours before, death.— tHow. lon§^r didi tho ,|iar«^^«ii^s <^ntiaue be£bre death took j^oq?
Two hours aj^dal^i^lt— «That,fm& «.^fie in ]«^lueh.^very, large dpaes of strychnia wefe
administered? We supposed four or five timQ». repeatedly .<^l have only one word or t^O'
to ask. you. on the s^^tject of the eamapri^^ta, i^tex d«^t^^ have yoneiperimented on the
tissues yourself or. on tha blood? X hav^ .^s^-it , dQjae.<-^Whan. did yon first see it dune 2
The day bff(^..tha trial.^rHoif loi^g ^aye you .he^n,*^ town? Several days. — Did you.
hj^w that this poison could be extRaoted, hf ^enaip^ fir^^M from th« tissues ? I thought
itprobahle. — ^Yon never. tried it? No, — How mavy oases did J!dr.. Heiapath try? One
oaae that I a^^w, — How was, the anmal. killed th^n ? By .a dosctof strychnia given by Uie
mputh. — A fi^id ? I am not sure. — ^Ti:y and recollect ? I.^annpt ; two more were killed^
-^What qaantity was given them ? I think it was half a gndn \ I did not make the
• experiment; there waa a dc^ and a /eat at the sa^ne tiuM* — In &e case of Leeds there
were four amimals killed afterwards from the contents of the stomach ? There were. —
You state that you have succeeded in every case where you have tried in your experi-
ments in finding the strychnia ? Yes. — You and Mr. Morley di0eved on that ? I think
I am correct, fi>r I have the original note. — ^Did not Mr. Mnrley differ in two cases ?
Tea; in one he did. — ^There was a difference of (pinion between you ? We divided the
poison which we found in the stomach into two portioiifi, and we adopted two different
processes for extracting it, and by the one process we were both rattier doubtful, but by
the other we produced it.— One of the processes fhiled and the other suoceeded ? It did.
-r^Now you thought you found it and he tfaouffht you did not ? Not that I recoUeot —
Do. not you know that Mr. Morley has been doubtful as to the results of these experi*-
ments ? No ; Mr. Morley stated differently in his own examination.'-*4n his examination
here ? Yea ; if you refer to it, except in one case» and that is the ef^planation I give
ofit. . , . t

H Re-examined by Mr. iS'(6/;/«an^ iS'A^^,

My learned friend the Attomey-<jleikeral has directed yom: ftttention 'to -your haviitr
stated in the t^Kurt which you drew up on one of theae. oases that the hands were- rigid
and the feet ineorved by muscular contraction ; pi»y« in making reports (^ this kiod'Of
the symptoms or appearances of the body after death, do yott state' only extraordinary
appeanuQcea, eroBoinary appearances as well as the extraordinary? Clvdinary appear-
ances also 9 dt is a statement of a &ict without anything morO. •

T^& Court adjourned far a-ehort tin^,

Mr, WiLUAM HEREPATH sworn.— Examined by Mr. Gr<m,
Are you Profossor.of Chemistry and Toxicologist at the Bristol Medioal School ? YcB.
— ^How long have yoa b«&n occupied in ehemistryand toxicology ? Chemistiy and.toa8i-
cology; chemistry much long{sr thai) t^^Q^ogy.TTrCl^emistry how; long?.. .phemif)ry 40
years and toxico^gy probably, 30, — ^Have ypu experimented on the poison of strypjmia?
Yes.—tiave you seen any cases in the human subject ? No j I have not seen^ a case^ I
presume you allude to the s^ptoms.

Lord Campbell. — You are not ^'medical practi^iofier ? J^o ; ,an analytical cheinist.

>Ir. (?nw«, — ^Haveyoii,s(6eniM^y case i?hw^ you hav;e examined the human body, whj;re
strychnia has been; takeu ? Xe5r; in ox^ecaseJihad. the contents of tb.«stQmach.--;*Iu^w^
one. case do you.aay you examif^d the.fiont^pis ojf the stomach;, what .did ih^ patient, jjie
from 1 From stryclvaia oply «Trrl)idj ou,i:i3C9gni^a Xl in . tlwt^^tate xm > oh^^ cat tc^ti jbeipg-
applied?.. Idiscovered it in.ihy cf^ntoAtf^Qftlie stoaipia^h.— HoTf, Ipng^er.ikp^th ? ,,It.mupt
have be^n about thre^e day§.af^r.4«^tAi^^W*a|..l^^ the test,ya^, uif^? « f,,pf^ume you.
mean the mode of proceeding before f Jji^ t^f .— I uieantj first of .aU .viba^tj .^a^ 'the test "by
which you discoTwe^ it? 4, u§ed «j|fljpiQf^/si4l?|i^riji 9^id,a»A,bicfo:omat)^ of potash;
sulphuric acid and peroi^de, of .fejid^, pucj^jjqi^^'e^ (vxideof.fefk^;. sjUpnuric acijjLai^
peroxide of manganese ; a fourth test, kuJ^tv^rii acid and. red fei*ri|i^p^e, of , potassium

—Are those Jhat you haye named y?hi(it,ypu.c^l tjiexqlpurytcists ^. ,,3s|i^y are one class of
colour-tests; these all produc,^ a purplcQcibuf ' witlj s^rych/u^Jtf.prip^^nl^.whiqh purple
j^asses to red $ th^r^ is another class 9^, 1ies^^>yi,th' qqmii^o.i> f try c^nia* ,, ...

Mr* BA»oii AifPGBaoNf— Th/9 fir^st . ^9» with j»urei strychftig. j . Yes. , . . .

Mr;- (ii'nQntf.-^rYoar pirooeisprevioudy to^applyiiig the^ tests ia>to gat the stryehnia
•sqpiirated»'«ndia<9Qiutij(}ii?.v ' ' >' '-/ " ^ r..,^,,^ < t- -

•» 'j'.i

280' TBSAJL 09 yfmHUM TitHSIL

Tlie frooev vhich luui been propoMd ha* tfem that wMish -WM gtteetliai^ yr o yoaw i by
Qrfila, to nevtraiise irith an aUtali^ thitn 't» etafofttte, ilnd' thcsa tiv diiablfe.

Mir. Orotf^t^'Did jou, in tlie eiae of the frnmah 8c/b}ect; niak^ erid^t the ezistenc« of
strjdiiifa by the colour l^ts? Certairfy.— ^Hrfve*70Ti experimetited on animals? I
hare. — ^To a lai^e exteAt f ' Not to a large exttetft ; srcfllcient to estatiHsli the princij)le.—
Oto yen tell us to ifhat extent ? Ih my oim experiments and fhoscT I hate Witnessed,
eight, nine, ' of ten. — 'Hare ybu succeeded fn those cases " in jvroting cheinlcally tlie
presence of strychnia? T have not analyted.them only; tfcere ar^ ttro which I hare
destroyed. — Confitie yoter attention to those wMch yon' nare analyse! ? There are two
wUeh I hare destroyed myself ; each of those irefe cats ; I ga^re one graiii of t^chfiia in
a ^d fannt I comd not get the animsa to tak^ H tdltlntarity, and I Ml 9t in illaeat at
xu^t when I w«iit to bed, ahd I^nntf the atitoal'de^' in the morning'; the bofdy was
diwkdfully ccmtorted.

Lord Camfbell — Kgld?' Extremely so; the fore limbs extended, tlie he^d turned
TOnnd, not to the ba)ck, out to tk^ side, the eyes protruding and staring; the iris expanded,
so as to be almost inyisible^

Mr. Grove^ — I do not wajaX' to interrupt you, but if you vlU come- to the medical
examination I shall be glad ? .In this animal I fouad in the urine wbidLhad been ejected
strychnia, ajcui 1 also found it in the stomach.^— J>id jon find it with tha tests you ha?e
mendoned? 'Ves.-^Tou stat^ there was a second case- in whieh yovi had administered
strychnia yoarself ? This also is a cat ; I gave the same quantity in a solid form
in food.

Lord CAHVBSLU-^IMd it <waUow it ? I made it swallow it ; it tmrnuwd ^ery^iet
for fifteen or sixteen mintttes, with but ifew symptoms nntil ^rty-fire minutes.-^Wlist
did yon observe then? It merely seemed a little restless with its eyes, the brcathbg a
little quickened^ and at thirty-five minnt^s it had a terrible spasm, the four extremities sod
the h^ being draWn together.

The Attorney- Oenerah^Do you mean the extt«mities of th« fomr legs? The fotir.—
Do you mean the four in number ? The four in number.

Mr. Grove, — How soon after did the animal die? I watched it for three honrs more;
after this it had a second spasm; a fh>thy sidivm was drippling firom its m^oth, and
it fbrciA>Iy ejected its urine ; it had a seesttd spasm a &ir aUntites altet» whea I
(honght m animal would die ; it sooa recovered itself and then remained qoiet, or si
least still, with die exception of a trembling all over.~-How hrng did it psmaift still ? 1
was going to state the pecoiianty of its manner; tke slightest '• breath of air would ai^
it; it continued in this state tiH i went to bed at half-past lO; thsit was three hoars^

The AUomey»G€neral,'^Wkki were yon going to ftate about the breath of air?
During this three hours and a ha^ or nearly soy the animal was. iit a peculiar state;
touching it appeared to ^ectrify it all through; even blowing upon it produced the same
effeet; toiiching the basket, the sl%htest thing that couM affect the animal, produeed a
sort of etectric jnmip ; patidneed an etffect like the deotric stream passing throtigh the
aidmal ; I left it t&en, tiiinking the animal wonldf reeov^^ bttt in the morning I foaud it
dead, in ithe ssualie Indurated a^ contraoted condition in which' fhe ibrmwr a&imal irs^
AwaL .... 1

Mr, Orcve. — How soon after that did you proceed with Vonr cheWical examination?
Alfe«trthfrty«six'*«mr8.--IMd you fihdstiychnia? Yes.-^^Wheffe?— Ifi the nrine, i« *?«
fllbmaeh,«»d ttpper intestineiB ; in th« lit'er'aaad in tbe bl^Mdof the hMn^-^n aH casesia
wMdi yoQi'have<tieett a obenneal examlsfation oa^Seai^h ibr stryeh^a has it hoen ibund;
didyott^^deteot^itby the «anie tests? YeS; bii«lw«ntaMiepb«yond; I took eittraordinsiy
means to get rid of the or^smdc ma(tter;-^Itt al!''«a#es irhii^h' yon have Men wbett
i^ry^Ma has hfev take^i has the examipaition bo^a sa^aesslal ? Not only ^tyehnia) J^
anx vomi^ from vrhi^ch skrychnia is extracted } I have Ibimd'niaX'Vovaiea ki li f •»: and m
twbdogV; •••■:.■ ' -'• " ■• ■;-•> ■ •.■>••' " ' i*

Lord CAisvBKtA.. — ^Does not rnut vomica present the same appeattttmw? Not e^V
iJie same, w Lord: t can eytwct the stryj^a from th«r body «Ten where irax v(ya»c»
hasheenthe^attsijof^eatli. *; .' ,- f/ \ ' -

Mr. Grove, — Do yOu mean that ntix vomica is more diMcult to discover ? It is more
<!omplicated of course. — Do you say you have, ^und strychnia in every case ^¥J]^
strychnia has been taken, ancf strycnnia alsd'VfeeS^fe hifx vOmiCa has been taken? ^*''
tainly ; in one case AfJ aalmftlfrhtKi 'beett Juried tWo month8.**Ma(veyott ^^cpeftewntsdjj^
MyehtMi mixedkup^ with onga^KT flHttt»fit0ifa«r thn ttho exf«ritteiil 'ytm ^^'^'^'^zL
It was putrid in the ease of the body; out i of the hody you fm/a^hu*YM^ 'iM^Mm Ffr"

loog haa it been allowed to lemain mixed witli the patrid matter ? I fbmtd in tiie-Uof»<
tory for examination some patrid yemaiwr; aad 1 iM^e fluxcMi strydinia with those in
Older to see whether U interfered with mj finding it.— Have you foimd it in aU thwe
cases, whatever wa£ the state of decomposition^ Ihaye.-^Are y^u of opinioi^ aa a.
chemist,, that where strychnia has been talten in a sp^lGJj^t dose to poison, it can be
detected, a|id ought lo he detected iQr chemical science ? Yes ; np to the time the hodj
is decomposed completely ; 1 meaa even where tiiere ia pntrefactiouj — Explain ^hat yon.
mean by " de^ompos^d completely *' and *' putrefaction '^ ? Where the body has become a
dry powder.-^Voii heard the evidence,as to the jars which were conveyed to Dr. Taylor;
are you of ofaaioo, in tl^e jar eontaming the .stomach, in the state it then was, finom your
chemical Imowledgie;, that strychnia ought to have i>eeB detected if it had existed ^re3
Yes, I am. — ^Axe your test^ ^able to Irremediahledanger from the snbstancea that have beea
named pyroxanthine ? I cannot conceive how it could ^t into a human stomadi. — ^Bat
supposing it got there ? The first step would detect it, without the bichromate of potash;
I sboald mention that body is not an article of commerce ; it is with the^greatest difficulty
it can be obtained. — ^Then yon are of opinion that it can be found? CertaiDly, provided
the organic matter is properly got rid of; you will understand the experiment in which
I fi>una it in the liver was not the one I inade her^ In London. — ^The experiments which
yda have mentioned were made at Bristol? At Bristol. — ^How many did you make here
in London ? I made three separate experiments on the same body. — On separate parCs of
the body? One on the st6macfa, one on the liver, aUd one on-^^ blood.

Lord Campbelu — ^Do you wish to have them detailed ?

Mr. Grow,^^lSis my Lord; did yon find it on ihoae oeeasieas? . I did, r to tbe satiBfiM»«
tion of thoae w1k)> Mimanded me^

Cross-examined by the Attomey-Generah

You are not a toxicologist? I do not profess anything of the sort. — ^When you have
experimented for the purpose of finding the strychnia, has that been principally in the
stomach ? Principally, until lately. — When did you first look for it in the tissues of the
body ? On the 6th (^ Minr. — With a view to this case ? Certainly, it was with a viewof
learning everything that I could. — Do not suppose that I. impute it as a matter of blame;
iahow many nstanees have y^em yonrwlf expefrk&eiHied ? Abont sine: ibes^ are not
small experiments ; they are things that have beea sent (o me; aniamld ra "v^faich 1 have''
found this ; with the> exception of the two last I made in Bristol and three I made ' in
London. — What was the one in Ix>ndon ? The one Jiere was a dog. — ^And this is tite ofily
one where you have found it in the tissues ? One in Bristol and a dog in London. — You
experimented on the tissues of those two cats? On one of the cats and one of the do^.—
Yoa found it^ I think yon say, in the cat ; wher^ did. you find it there, -in the tissues ? "In ^
the liver, the heart, and in the urine, besides the stomachs What quantity was gi^n to '
tike dog which you .experimented on in London ? One grain ; it was a large dog. — A.- grain *■
is a considembie dose ? Yes; I- have seen an animal destroyed with a qnaiter of a grain ^
it was intended to give .it half argrain, but it spilt it, and therefore a Quarter of a jgram
kSled it/— You say you think that if strychnia were present it ouffht to be discovered ; nave'
ypu not fluids and ssud more than once, that ^ou have no doubt that strychnia was present^]^
but that Professor Taylor had failed to find it ? No, certainly not. — K&ive you not said so '^
to the present mayor of Bristol ? I hfive said, ** It it was thelre Professor Taylor ougilt to
have found It," — ^Have you not said several limes in his presence that yeu had no doilfabl
that strychnia had been given in this case^ but that Professor Taylor had not fixind it? . Ji<-
had a strong opinion from the Reports of .the newapapers; it is very likely I might : Ldo-^
not deny it ^ I ha^ a strong opim.on frpm the newspaper reports ^t strychnia had been*
given, judging from the newspaper r^orts. .. -^

LoRi> Camfbell. — ^Froni tjlie stateriitotsYoa saw in the hetrsfapep? ? Vhpm the state-
xnents I saw in the newspaper*; I was not at a!! eii^ed in the case, and' I concelvfed'I'had'.
a right to express an opmion, the same as others. — Was that from the statement you had

seenof the symptoma? • * ' . . m. > •. . •

Jifh Serjeant Shee,--We 'ihust'inow ^Hk't'tftat sistfemeni wast' If wa^ foiindeS on a.
statement which I had seen in a great number of newspapers, ^^'lUmrate^ Times amongst
thereat. •• ^--^ • '•• • "■"' ' ' ' " '••" "'

»-*' >

Mf. i$f€r/ea»* ^«L.-~TW. cornea .to.wth^,

The JiMmniy*Gm$tca*^ beiSttve>yoii have etcfKressed thatl <«ij^ittk» teetfMnxdff?' i d^^n^
say: Xhave in eodv^riMioB? pertew h«v«ii«lurallTifw>ken to me on 'tile suB^t^ bwadfcdf'
of people iaiked to me, knowing that I have made toxicology a study ; they hiav^ IfeflMI'

232 TKIAL OF WILLIAM PiLMER.

to me about it, and it is possible I might hare said something like vhat yoa bare asked
m^aboiit ' ' ' •'

Re-examined by Mf. ^^ftwe.

What is the smallest ouafitity yoa have detected in the tissues of the stomach? The
smallest quantity in the dog^s stomach ? — Yes. 1 cannot say ; I can shov it you.— Can
you give us an opinion as to the quantity ? I^ it is perfectly free from organic matter, I
am satisfied that you could discover the fifty-thousandth -part of a grain that !s unmixed
with organic matter { ten graios of thi^ body is soluble in a gallon of water.'-^t>0 yon mean
to say you have experimented by dissolving a given (|[uantity, and you haye ascertained
that yon can discover that quantity ? — ^Yes, I'was going to tell vou ; I dissolved the tenth
part of a grain in a gallon of water, that is, one in Kr,000; I can liike^tH^ ifitih part of a
drop of the water and dem^nsttnte the preseiffeeof strytJhnhL— Ton have fte^ Aj^lung noMr
of strycfazda simply ^Kolved an9 diluted ; irhat qttantity can you detect Srhen ^<m separate
it from organic matter ? If it is perfectly ft*ee f^otai organic matter, do ^ou mean ?— *1 ^ant
yon to ^ve me, as nearly as you ean, what is' the smallest portion of stryehnia when
mixed with organic matter you can detect? I cannot teU you ; that will deptod on the
nfttnre of the matter.

The Atiorneij-G^neral.'^'V^e the heart of a human subject thAt has had one grain ?
Very little indeed ; it is a difficult experiment, but it can be shown, and has been shown.
—What portion ? I cannot tell you. — ^A very small portion ? I have no idea.

Lord Campbell. — ^Would it be appreciated ? I found it in about an ounce and a half
of the blood of the dog.

Mr. Grove. — In the liver? I took an eighth part (the dog weighed about 28 lbs.) by
guess ; I took what I conceive to be the eighth part of the liver ; the gentlemen who were
with me thought it was a tenth part ; and from that I had enough to make four distinct
experiments with the four tests. — So that you experimented on a thirty-second part of
the liver of the dog ? Yes.

Mir. Babon Alderson. — You perceived the violet colour ? Yes. — And the changing
to tlie red afterwards ? Yes, the proper passing to the red.

*

Mr: JULIAN EDWARD DISBROWB ROGERS sworn.— Escamined by Mr. Oray.

Are you a professor of chemistry at St. George's School of Medicine in London? I .
am, and have be^ n for the past sixteen years. . •

. Lord Campbeuu— Where is that ? In Grosvenor Place.

' Iiord OAMPBELL^--St. George's Hospital ? No, they are schools.

Mr. Gray, — Have vou made experiments on animals with a view of extractkiff strych-
nine from the bodies ? I have made an exi>eriment on one animal. — When was that ? It

give It to him ? Between two pieces of meat. — ^Was it pure strychnia
Pttre strychnia ; two grains. — The dog died of course; did you afterwards remove the
fftxnnach of the dog and its contents, and take some of the blood ? I did so. — How long
after you had killed the dog? Three days.— When did the stomach and blood become
putrid; how soon after you removed them'? The blood in about ten days. — ^Did you
lihalyse the blood with a view to find strychnia ? Ten days after the removal from the
body,; when it was putrid.— Did you separatis the strychnia? I did so.— Can you say
ftow nmch you found? I cannot say. by weight, but sufficient to demonstrate by three
eiperiments that it was present.

Lord Campbell. — By the colour tests? By tlie colour tests such as have been
prescribed.

Th&Mtomfiif'G£neral. — Colour tests would ^ not givp you the quantity? Not any
further than they irere colours. produced.

Mr. Qni^, — Did you afterwards proceed U> analyse the stomach and its oonteots?
Not isomedistely.

Lord Campbxll. — How long after ? A month or five weeks,

Mr. Gray, — What did you then do ? . Some other matters pressed, and I put it aside.
— ^Had this matter beconie putrid before you experimented npon it ? Yes : I treated it with
acidulated distilled water. — What ? The stomach and its contents ; and the experiment
was not finished, by its being put aside, till'^en' days since; the 8ti7chnia was separated
in a large quantify*— How much? It did not give me tbe weight, bat if I produce any
large quantity of colour, tha^ will enable -ipe to judge, and I infer that I have got a large
quantity.

EIGHTH PAY, May 22, 1856. 233

Lord Cabipbeli«. — By the colour tests the presence of strychnia is ascertaiae^?
Unquestionably. — But as to measure aad weiiigiit,. you^camiot at all sav ? No.

.Mfr (^a^,.-7:Ha,ve you ever had occasion to analyse any part pf the human stopi^ch?
Not for strycbJiia, but for other poisons.-^! will ask you this: have you heard the
«yldeuce as to. the stoinachan4 its contents iOt John Parsons Cook being put in a jfu* and
sent to. London ? 1 have, — In your judgment strychnia, if it had been administered to
Cook, must it have been .found in the contents of the stomach ? Unquestionably, I give

that opinion

f Cross-esi^min^d by the Aptomej/,- General,

How niMiy experjiinents havja yos made with strychnia 9 Only one, on this dog.-*-
Hy friend piat the question as to tha contents of the stomach in th« jar ; do you think it
FOttld make any di&rence if the contents, were lost ? If there were no contents ^vead
over the^ intestines, then that wooldmake a diflSerence; if 'they had been apilt and
«bakeivi thea it woiiid make no diJ6Eere»c&-->Biit supposing they were not there ? There
vould be the washinga of the.slomach. . ,

Lord Campbell. — The difficulty would be an enhancement ? ' Of couite it would
make a more perfect direction, if I may say so, necessary ; I do not consider it a diffienlfy
▼here it only enhances the trouble. >

Mr. Gray, — Suppose you had none ; suppose the stomach sent yot had no contents ?
I would wash the stomach, and proceed with that. — ^Are you. a medical man? I am. —
You did not analyse any of the tissues of this body ? No, I did not ; the urine was lost.

there had been any strychnia ? That is my opinion. — You have made no experiment on
the tissues of the body ? No ; I gathered from that experiment, as well as from other
experiments, that strychnia would be found in a putrid body. — So that the time that, has
elapsed since Cook died, if you had had an opportunity to operate on it, ^ou wottld have
foimd the strychnia ? If it had been there, I feel satisfied I should find it.

Lord (Xlwbvell^—Do you mean then or now? I dMnet ^ee^jthst the itlme iiHmld
prevent it,

Be-examined by Mr. Grciy, «

Would you expect on the mucous membrane in the stomach, even if the contents wei^
lost, to find it ? I think I knorw what you mean : if strychnia had been in -the' ctititents
of the stomach there would be a portion of the contents smeared ovctf theicoii&oe^ bnd
in that smeajted surface, when washed^ I should expect to find the .sttgiiehnia, « >"/

fv »inf.

Dr. HENRY LETHEBY sworn.—Examined by Mr. Keneaty, ,
Are you » bachelor of medicine and professor of chemistry in thfi^ Medic^ Co]]^ q£
the London Hospital?,, lam a bachelor of chemisjay and professor ofme^^ciM. nptja
iachelor of medicine, in the iKindou Hospital,— jAre you also a ]^led^c9lOffice)i.oit:Ja^ti^
to the City of I^oaidon ? ,1 am.— Have you beeu' engaged foi: a cousiderabk tfm€^ip.,^hja
study of poisons ? Yes ; i have.— Have you also been engage^ fre^uent^y 91^ ^jeh^^f.^f
the Crown in, iMX)Sjecu^ou& of casjes of this nature ? , Yes, I have : 1 believe ip. every, case
of this kind that has been tried in this court during the last fourteen years.— fe^/y^oit
been present in Court during the examinatloii of the medical witnesses at tMs^^t^aJtR

Yes, I have. — I suppose you have, attended to, the erldeuce that they g^yef' Yes,,jf
liave.-C< * ' ' . ^ ^.-..-:r ___... „j..__.,..^_..t. _r\^-iti_f.-, ^„.

I have

cases

cases of nux vomica in the human subject, one of which was fatal. — ^Have you'^dtt Cj^e*

of that kind? Yes, I have>--Do- the^syiiiptttmS'tJiat titlieMed the cases o^faiilrtial^

accord with the symptoms described in this case? ' Thfeydo tiot^^Tn wliM^^^i&tOars

do the symptoms of anlwftls wiSmt^^itatA stryolniine' dilfev;fBo» l^iose Jdescifli ed itf re ?

In the first place, I have never witnessed such a long interval between theladndBii^tioii

of the poison and the cominf oBX)f theisysi9Uims;as>lft.siu^.taJbiHve.Q9yi^ae^

—After the administratlpn of ;8tryJcl^^»JJ.P9jf|w^ to. apiw]«».>Wj?fl^^.^.^79^ observed

the symptoms to begin? The longest ri^t^J^^ J l^^^-^^^^^^W.)^^

of an hour:-^What has been, thp sjorti^t?,., yin^ jihen t^ poiso^,,w.a&give;x under what

^ay be termed the most disadvsjjitagie^ius. Qirp;um^.t?.jices an. order to prolong the perio^

■--What were the disadvantageous circumstance^ updearv^ich. ijlje poison was given?

Avery full stomach, and the poison given Jn ^a form.not.e^sy of solution.— what is

the shortest time that you remember wnerie the symptoms began after the poison was

administered ? I have seen it begin in five minutes.— I suppose you have seen many

234 mUL OF ^LLIAM PALMEH.

taidredf «f eMe»«f the admfaiistratlon of Btry c lmltiet T Vffl not My ttany hundreds
of eases ; I irill say dosem.— -Wlisit is the arerage time when the symptotnA begin ? A

Snarter of as hour would be the ilTerage time. — It there Utiy other jyarUealar besides
elay in the appearance of the symptoms from wliich too conelnde this Is not a case
of BtryehBia ^laon ? In all the animals I hare seen, and the human subject also, when
aader sCiyehnine, the system h«i been in that iyrit^le "Stat^ that the rery ttightest excite-
ment, aa an eflbit to move, • slight teneh, a noiae, at a btteath of air, will set them off
in conyulsioDS. — Let us assome a case ; do you beliere it possible that a person to whom
a dose of strychnine had been given eonld rise out of Us bed and nng a bell riolently ?
I cannot vndectake to say what is possible ; it ia jmC at hli pi Dbafa ia u "*0>ii>d he pull a
bcU yiolaiitly ? I do not thank it is ptoba1Ae.--Wliat would be tke proUafale effiast of ^
¥ibcatioDof the beU-poll on him ? Any* naovemeat at all woaid exoite'tiie naroas sys-
tem and there would be spasm, there wonUL he eoBvulsionsb^Do ifeiK think • penm
in that state of nerroas irntaii(» coaM bear to have his nook rubhttd 9 Itisnotlikdy.
— ^Where a case of poisoning by strychnine does not tesauaate fiMaliyv what is theefllBet
•n a person wheo the paroxyaas or spasm gaeao£'--The paroxysm ia aiMoaeded by tfther
parosyBmsi whioh gradwally shade theauelvea off $ they genemUy become less and lea,
one paroxysm being less in violence than the other, over a period of aoaae hoon.— Would
you fix, as near as yon can^ the time which it would probably ts^e before the msm gets
better ? My experience agrees with Dr. Christison, that it would last over a period of
sixteen or eighteen hoarse

liord CaxfbsUi. — ^Have yoa seen any ease in which aatidotes. have been ^en?
Yea, I have. — Is that morphia? That is the usual hospital practice ia the caies of
patients under the influence of strychnia ^hieli I have witnessed, ajad aaiidotss have
been administered.

Mr. Xeneahf, — Do I uadetataad you to say there woidd not be wm entire oessatioa of
the ^ttaaas, bat that they giadnaliy go off dariatp the time of tea or tw wi i i^ ^ hoiaa? Yd.
••-Is sbrychniiae a poiaon which is easily foaad? I do not hesitale to say it i»«f ^
poisons the moat easy of deteotioB.

Lofd CAMnaaJL. — ^Either mineral or vegetable ? Yes, aiy Lord.

Mr. Kenealy, — ^Have you detected it in the stomachs of jinimals in numetoitf '^'
stances? Yes, I haVe.— Have you detected it in the blood and in the tissues? Yes, I
JhoMre. — ^What ia the period after death in which yoa have succeeded in delecting ^<^^'
niae? The longest period after death. ttait I have examiDed a bady has been one moD<^'
^-^isk what state was the aahaal? laa slate of d e ctwa poei tioa^-^Haveyoa saceeeded in
detecting vary nimrte portma of the ateychnino? Yes; I haaa;-*Wh«t ia the suit
minute portion of strychnine which ^ou have been enabled to detect ? When the strych-
nine is pure then it can be detected in a very small portion of a part, at least the 20th
paft of a grain.

matter

detect tne tentn part of a crai
broth : I have detected it m broth.
^ Mr. Kenealy^-^AsuX whether the liqjoor was pure or putrefied have you detected it?
Yes, I have detected it in the most puUid liquor X could obtain in which the tenth p^
,of a grain has been found. — ^You live told us you have succeeded in detecting i* ?
animals which have been killed a monlli, and were in a state of decomposition ; what is
the dose yoa have given them? I gave the animal originally half a grain, and I ^^*
the strychnine here within a fraction of what I gave him..

t Lord. CaMPBBU*.— What aaioial was that? M rabbit, my Lord.->Did this half &
Crain kill the animal ? It did.

Tke ^fGm^^tfR0r«/«-*.Within hotw muoh did yoa say yoa have H ? Within a ve^T
amall ^* —

Lord Cavfbbll.-— In what propinrtimi? I lostabeut the lentil patt of VLffifb^'^^
eonrse of tiie ittvestigatioD.

Mr. JPpw«/'y.— There is a question I fbrgot to ask yon ; you say, in a pint cf fi<F^
in which the tenth part of a grain was 'put, you operated ; on how much did you ^Pf*^
I operated on the whole. — ^Prom your knowledge and experience, what eonclusion ^^^^
draw from strychnine not having been detect^ in either of the Jwrs that wete sent w>
Dr. Taylor?

The Miorney-Oftieral oljected to the question..

Mr. JT^nea^.-^^upposiBg a person had received strychnine ei^ht or ten ^yi^^^
and that he died of the strychnme poison, should you be able positively to say ^ ^

2iad d«it^ot^ it ? , I 4q. flf^y SQ p<¥iti<vdy^ ; I h^e nsrer &iUd.H[ miivom yov ]wt« made

post-mor^m examinadona <m thwe yanoos animals wlncb you havedaskroyed by atryek-
xiipe ? Yesji J have,— la vhat QaiidM»<m hare yon fi>uikd invariably Ihe heart ? AAwws
ih« right side full of blood.--Oaii yim explain the phyaieal reaaoa of that ? Yea ; the
death taHes plaee l)y th^ fixing of th^ mnsclea of the chteat in apaasa.

Lord C4JiVBELL,-el8 thataoinTanahlTi^ I think ao; in a^y opimatt it is so; aithat
time the blood is l^lable to pass through the huiga, and the heart eaennot TeMeve itaalf of
the hbod that ia flowing into it; it thmlore heooBMB gorged.

in the

strychnine In a li'^d and in a tsoHd form? Yea, I have. — ^06 yon agree in the opinion
Dr. Taylor, that where' strychnine is administered as a sort of pill or bohis, it kills from
.•about SIX to eleven minntes ? Yes, it niay do so ; I do not say it woald always. — ^Was I
wrong in saying that it kills, or that the symi]Aoms begin f It may kill. — If H Is ad-
ministered In a pill, will it show itself in that time 9 It may do so. — ^What is the fitst
remarkable symptom yon hare noticed after the stryehnine begins to operate on the
animal ; Dr. Taylor says it taMs on its side ? When it is in spasm it falls on its side. —
Do you agree with him that tiic jaws are spasmodically closed ? They are so some-
times. — ^Do yon oigfet with him thai ike slightest noise or touch reproduces another con-
Tulsive paroxysm? I have said so. — ^Dr. Taylor has said that the colouring tests ftr
tiie discoTery of strychnine are fallacious ; do yon agree with him in that f No, I do not.

Lord Caupbell. — ^You say they always succeeded with you? They did, my Lord.

Mr. KenecUi^ — Dr. Taylor has given as a reason for the non-Hnding of the stryehnine
that it ia absorbed into the blood and becomes changed ? I agree with its absorption,
but I do not agree with its being changed. — ^Have ^ou tamed your attention to the
theory that strychnine is decomposed after the poisoning ? I have examined the tissoes
of the body, and I have found it; and my opinion is that it is not changed so as not to
be discoverable. — You have had another reason suggested for the non-disoovery of the
strychnine, that the contents of the stomach were so mixed u(p and jhmhled together ;
is that a good scientific reason ?

The Mtoney-'Q^imral stated thiit the oontenta were not tiatre at *U.

Mr. JTimeafy.— Apposing the oontenta were pat into a Jar, and jwnblttd up wHh the
^testines and a povtaon of Sie stomach, would that prevent the diaecnrevy of strycliaiB«,
a the person had died of strychnuie? It woald not — Supposing tlmt all the contenta of
the stomach were lost, ought the moeons membrane, in the ordmary eoorse of things, to
exhibit tracea of strychnine ? Ithinkso^ — ^Have yon also studied the polsoii of antimony?
Yes. — ^Now, supposing a quanti^ of antimony were placed in some brandy<«nd<-watflr,
aadit waa drto^ off at at a sndden gnlp, wwdd the inmiediate effect of (iiat be to bom
the thioat, or anything of that kind? No. — ^Does antimony, in ]>oint of Ihct, to yvar
knowledge, poaaesa any such quality as that of immediate horning ? No, not tartar
Metic ; not that form of antimosiy. — For how many years have yon tamed your atten-
tion to poiflona? I auppose for 17 or 18 y«ars«

Cross-examined by the Attomey'Gmardt,

Are you a member of the College of Physicians ? No, I am not. — ^Are you a member
of the College of Surgeons? No, I am not. — ^Do you carry on business in the medical
line? I do not now ; I do not practice medically. — Have you ever done so ? I have
done so. — In what capacity ? In general practice ; that meana every species of mjedical
practice.

Lord Caufbeu.. — ^For how long ? Not more than two qk three years.

The MtonMy^Qwer9l,''^fiia mentioned }^ou used to be enqployed for the Ccown; I
believe the last case that you were empkxyed in was some time ago ? It was. — Whieh
Wtf that ? The cMe of Ann MeHt.^£k>w.l«ig ago ? I think it was in 1850.^1851 waa
it not? IS&l.— Did yon ffive evidenoe in tint case of the pcesenee oi arsenic? Ye8.<»*-
Was the wcaaaa oonvioted? Yea, she waa.-^Did you state,, h^ adddtisn to< tiw flndiag
of the arseoic, your* opimon that it had been administered aa raoeBtljf as two hoartr
No, four hour8.-^The aeptepce was not canned into efiect? In consequence oi my
having writt^ a letter it was not: I was the oaose of herbetaig leapited.— -Did aat othdr
aoientific mea interfere and challenge the aoundneas <tf yoor eondtumma before yon wxofee
any letter at all? Yea.— Bb^e you been empk>yed by the Crova siaoe? I have been
emploj^ed on the part ef prosoentioaa, bnt I cannot say whether by the Csowb or nnfeH*-
What is the season of that? There has not beena caaa that I know oC

Mr. JuisncB GBasswxix*— I waa preseat at the trial of Ann Merit, aad I peritecdf
lenamber it

336 TRIAL OF WlLUAM PAIMEH.

The Attftmeif^GeimraL — ^The whole question turned on the aoeuncy of the opmion as
to how lately the poiton had been administered: yon were the only scientific man
euonined ? I was the one who detected the poison and gave my opinion, and I still hold
that opinion, and stated that in my letter : the question was pat to me as to the possibility
of anything else: I did not speak of possibilities, I spoke of probabilities. — How n>any
imtm^u have yon destroyed by means of strychnine ? I cannot tell ; it has spread orer a
iong period ; pretty well on fifty, I suppose. — ^Recently ? Some recently ; some within the
last two months, I think.-^Whkt doses haye yon given ? Never more than a grain.— In
what form have you administered them ? — ^In these recent cases ? I suppose you limit my
attention to those? — Yes. Always in a solid form; sometimes made into a pill vith
bread, and at other times put on the tongue of the animal. — I suppose it woula operate
sooner if put on the tongue ? I am not 6ure of that; because it adheres to the tongue
and does not get absorbed so soon, from the circumstance that there is no acid. — Still a
pill would have to be dissolved ? I think it would be shorter, because it gets into the
jieid sur&ce, and is more speedily acted upon by that which is capable of producing the
dissolving of it. — In one case, you said, you put the poison into a form which was not
easy of solution : in what case was that ? In the case where I gave it under the disadvan-
tageoos circumstances i the dog had bad a very hearty meal, and it was kneaded up into
ahard mass and with some bread, and it took three quarters of an hour before the action
came on. — Can you tell us whether the dog swallowed it ? I never allow them to take it yo-
luntarily : I always open their mouths and put it into the throat. — What has been the longest
' case after that between the interval and the administration ? I do not remember an auiml:
yes ; there was one other which took about half an hour, but the poison was not given
m sufficient quantity. — ^How was that given ? In a solid form, and it did not manifest
an action, and we gave it another dose. — What was the amount of the dose ? Half a
grain; and we gave it altoother dose.- — Within how soon did that act? About ten
minutes. — ^With re^rd to what was said by Dr.^Nunneley, as to the symptoms, have yon
noticed the same thing ? I have noticed the irntabiiity of the aninud before it is con-
Tiilsed: he talks of the ears twitching. — What he describes is this: first, a desire to be still,
tiien a difficulty in breathing, a slabbering of the mouth, twitching of the ears, trembling
of the muscles, and after that followed by convulsions ; did you observe all these ? 1
cannot say all of them in that order : there is an excitement manifested in the animal,
«n indisposition to touch, and trembling on being touched. — I am speaking of the sym-
ptoms before the convulsions ; the touching, did that occasion a tremulous action of the
mascles ? Yes, I have noticed that. — ^Hacve they come on in regular order? No, I thmk
Aot^— Sometimes one set in one animal and another in another very much varied? Not
very much ; but there are those littie variations. — ^After the convulsions have once com-
menced, is there an interval? Yes. — ^Ilien, if I understand you, a breath, a sound, or a
touch, will cause a recurrence of the convulsive symptoms ? Yes. — ^That is aAer they
have been seised ? Yes. — That would not apply to a case where the animal died in the
rfirst paroxysm ? Certainly not. — Have you known an instance where an animal has died
4n the first paroxysm ? Many. — You mentioned that there is a distinctive feature in this
case of Cook, that you were surprised at Wa manifesting so much power as to be able to
sit up in bed and ring the bell : are you aware that that was at the first commencement,
before any of the convulsive symptoms had set in ? Yes, I apprehend that was at the
t)nset or beginning, as it were, of the paroxysm.— This was before the convulsive spasms
began : do you know that he sat up in bed and rang the bell, and it was not until Palmer
had been and had gone back, and brought the pills, that the convulsions came on ? Yes,
i do ; and I have noticed in animals that the mere touch sends them into convulsionSi
and they show an indisposition to move. — Did you hear about the lady who died near
Bomsey ; did you hear what the maid said that first she discovered, when her mistress's
l>ell rang violently, that she had got out of bed and was sitting on the floor? — It struck
me as inconsistent with what I have seen. — ^Have you any doubt that was a death firom
strychnia? Not at all. — ^If that evidence, be true, and it is a fact that she got u^ and
rang her bell, does not that shake your Mth ? But at the same time it is not consistent
-wi^ what I have seen. — I ask you whetiier that fiiet does not shake your opinion ? No,
'3t does not; you mnst compare it with what I have seen : I tell you that both of them
-are irreconcileable with what I have seen. — ^Yet you know this lady died from strychnia 7
I should think so, I have no doubt of it. — With the exception of the symptoms which
'Came on at a longer period after the supposed administration of the poison, a longer ?^^^
than you have ever known, is there anything to distinguish these symptoms after the
-attack from the symptoms of tetanus from strychnia? Yes, on the Monday night—I si&

<^ the l^anjdk HmX in tlua p^ UVas «n Jb/oar pr jio hour (and .« <lialf : cftn y<m point taany-
tiling to d^ltin^uis^ :&e s^pto^s a^ death <xC Mr. Cpok ficpni deatti by tetanus Metrjchiiia?- .
NoyXcwmot : it is weoiisistent irith what X b&ye seem, but it is not inconsistent with what I
have heard in .th^ case of Mrs. Smy thu-^Js not one ot' tli& sys^ytoms hand breathing ? It is
a panting ifespiration.] iX is, excitement of the breathing rather than difficulty : it is not an
early ^mptow, it is, in the CQnii;ttl^ipns that thfi^re is « diffien^t^ of bneathing ; if a man vere
to breathe ,h^T.<% It^s i(p9sitiof^,^atu|raiJi>; a^umed for hiai to sift u|>.^— Until the oonvulsiona;
of ^he muscle coi^tie on , is ;ther^ anyljhing to pce^fptthe patoeitt fiiom> sitting up 2 Nothing :
atall^— If I understand yon^if ^.exce^ th^. delay and.theifiMto^JhiSinttiji^ up in bed and
crmg for.helpj,ia tjijjlere^inythin^.to d^^tingQi^h^tbe QOn-vutUiKins under which this man suf*
fered and 'dieaicom the copVulsions of tetanus hj stryohnia?* Do you meau the fit of the
Monday ulght2-^t am $peaking.of Uie Tf-ipiBsday^ „Jtig,nqt,perfeetly consistent with strychnia
becaiise I say .that the .account which >s. g^yen./of .Mn^* Smyth i$ what I. cannot reconcile
Vith wha.t I iiave before observed..— With iiagard t9> the al^pt itenttination, instead of the
gradual si^h^idlence in the cases where jrou haye|Qb»aV9f)d^ in- AnianaJs. where the full dose
is given ,^ And on the human, subject also, I am ^peahing from! my experience : ^ere was
a mau: — ^'.-^What dose had he taken ; do ycni kao;iv 'i The dose would be nearly a
grain and a half of strychnia* — That is a. strongish doae^.iB it not? YeSr^You might
expect a recurrenoe»of the paroxysm ? Certainly : the. subsUenoe will not depend on the
strength of the dose, it will depend on this whether the- indiTidmal ia to.veeoyier or not:
I have seen four or five instances of racoyeries; .and at the. time. Dr.. Pereira waB making
his experiments administering strychnia, I haye seen peaplaiwder fuUdoseflof stryohnia;
therefore 1 am speaking of what I haye known done, because- they were .treated with so
large a dose, which consisted of a grain and a half of strychnia ia the ooucseof a day.«-~
That would keep up the recurrence of the symptoms? He ceas^ when be found they
▼ere under its influence : the dose was stopped then.^^r-YoiL had been working them up
to that point ? The effect does not manifest itself in the small do8e.r^Wheii:dra you giye*
them a larger dose ? It is possible it may be the othw portion is carried; awa^ srom - the
system. — U it not generally known that the effect of strychnia itTer^ varied m diffaremt
individuals? No, I do not think so: I think there is great uniformity in the attacks >of.
strychnia: there would be a little yariation in time, but in the mun features of the case
there is no yariation. — ^Do not you find this difference, that from the same dose in the
same species you get no paroxysm, or you get a series of paroxysms teominating in
death? Yes, that is true; but the attacks are the same for all that: the symptoms
31^ the same. — ^What do you say about the Sunday night fit? I was cUsposed to..
think it was a fit : 1 cannot tell you what it was, I haye formed no opinion. — What do
you ascribe Mr. Cook's, death to ? It is irreconcileable with eyerything I am. acquainted
with.

Lord Caau?bbijl — Is it reconcUeable with any known disease which you have ever '
seen or.heard of ? No».my Lord.

Re-examined by Mr. Serjeant Shee,

You say it is not reconcUeable with anything you have ever heard of: do you mean
to say it could not be the result of any variety of conyulsions, however vic^ent, though
^ot classed under a particular description of convulsions? In order to answer the*
<luestion I must tell you we, are learning new facts every day, and I do not conceive it to
be impossible that. some peculiarity of the spinal cord, unrecognizable ejLcept the
examination be made Immediately after death, may produce symptoms like these. —
When you say it is irreconcileable with anything you haye heard of, do you include any- '
thing you have heard of strychnia poison as well as anything else ? Certainly I do.

Lord Campbell. — That is natural disease or poison ? Ov poison, my Lord.

Mr. Serjeant Shee:- — Is the vomiting of the pills just belbre death inconsistent with 1„
^hat you. have known and observed of strychnia poisouf ? It is riot consistent with any- ,
thing I have observed. — ^You haye befen asked whether in tjie interval between the fits of
an animal under the influence of the strychnia poison touching it does^ not bring a
paroxysm on: have you tried and ascertained' whether if you touch an animial which is
^ginning those minor premonitory symptoms,^but which as yet has had, no paroxysms^
vill the touching it at that time bring the paroxystos on ? Yes.

Lord Campbell. — ^That is before the paroxysms f Just so, before the paroxysms
«ome on. " . '

Mr. Serjeant Shee, — ^Was not the Romsey ctwc an exceptional case from the
manner in which the strychnia was administereld and the quantity of the dose ? Yes, it
was,— Would not, in your judgment, the ringing of the beU by the lady the. moment she
felt anything of uneasiness produce, the paroxy^n which ultimately was dMserved?

Q

288 TKUL OF WaUAM PALH£S.

Precisely lo ; ^bmt H is quite oannstent with ail I am s^ing, doit a aioveineiit would
excite a paraayim. — ^In your judgment, is it safe to argue ftom the fymptoms of a case in
which ihe paroxysm took place only a few moments after the ingestion of the poisoa,
and it was m a fluid state, what may he the probahiHties of another case? No.^Boes
it appear to you there can be a difference in the main features of the two cases, 8i]|ipoBi]ig
there had been strychnine p<nsoB given to Cook, as to the matter of its administratioii and
the time which has elapsed? Na — In the Romsey case the ^poison was administered ia
a liquid, and the panxxysms took place within 10 minutes; is it safe, in your opinicm,
to argue of the symptoms that occurred in that case as to what nnght be the nature of
the nsabdy in this? With regard to the great features, they are the same in all instances;
the mode in which it u admmistered, in a fluid or a solid form, w^ make a difference
in the time of the operation, but not in the nature of the operation. — ^You have been
asked about this matter of discussion respecting this Merritt case : are you still of opinion
that the eridence you gave on that trial is correct? Certainly; I have not altered my
o|«Boiii-^Are you aware of there being any ground of imputation on you in reference
te that matter? Not the slightest— Have you any ground for supposing until thU
moment that there was any displeasure on tiie part of Government ? I know of none ; I
Iwve been on the prosecution side in cases, and I yery much think the Crown has been
the prosecutor ; it came to my knowledge after the trial that odier ^ntlemen differed
fl-em my opinum, and I answered their objections ; Dr. Pereiiu came to the laboratory
and said. Save tlids woman's life if you can by admitting a possibility of its being other-
wisej and I said, I hare no objecticHo ; that letter wasta&en to the Secretary of State, and
withm one hour the le^te came ; it was an act of mercy on the ground of the possibility
of error. — ^You wrote a letter to the Secretary of State, admitting the possibility that yon
mi§^t have been under a mistake ? No, he asked me, as an act of mercy, to write a
letter to him, to be shown to the Heme Office, to admit the possibility of ^e p<»son we
Ibund in the stomach hsring beoi administered longer tiian Ibur hours before death ; I
wrote a letter, and in admittiag lliat, drew an instance of what would be possible bnt not
psobsMe ; I do not know whemer I can teU you. what that isfltanee was. — ^Never nund
that.

Lord Campbox.— The woman was pardoned ? — No, my Lord, transported for life

Mr. BOBEST EDWARD GAY swom.— Examined by Mr. Barjeemi 8hee.

I "believe you are a Fellow of the Royal College of burgeons ? I am a Member, not a
Fellow. — Do you remember attending a person of the name of Foster, suffering nnder
tetanus ? I do, in 1855. — ^Will you state the symptoms of the case and the course of the
malady, and its cause, as far as you know it/ I was called to Foster on the 2nd of
October, 1855 ; he had an inflammatory sore throat, muscular pains in the neck and the
upper portion of the vital vertebne ; he was feverish, and he had the usual symptoms
attending a catarrh ; I put him under the usual treatment of saiines and aperients, also
using embrocations externally to the muscles of the neck and throat ; I also prescribed

Sxgles for him, which he used ; on about the foui*teen.th day, as nearly as I can remember,
e muscular pains extended to the face ; a difficulty of swallowing came on, the paiQS
in the muscles covering the vital vertebrae became increased, as also did those of the fece
in the lower jaw ; in the evening of that day the jaw became completely locked, the pai^
came on in the muscles of the bowels, the Isame in the legs and the arms ; he became very
much convulsed throughout the entire muscular system ; he had frequent and violent
convulsions of the arms and hands, and afterwards of the legs ; the difficulty of swallowing
increased up to the ninth or tenth day ; not a parti.cle of food either solid or liquid couW
be taken, or introduced to the mouth ; and an attempt to swallow the smallest portion
brought on the most violent convulsions ; the convulsions were so strong throughont tn^
whole system, that I could eompace him to nothing more than a piece of warped boaro
in shape; the head was drawn back, the bowels were fbsoed forward.

Lord Cahpbell. — ^The abdomen ? The abdomen was forced forward, and the Ifp
were ftequently drawn upwards and backwards; the attempt of feeding with the spoo »
the opemng of the window, or placing the fingers on the pulse frequently brongnt
violent convulsions; he complained of great hunger.

Mr. Serjeant Shee, — ^He could speak? He was able to speak ; he repeatedly cried oa^»
*' he was very hungry, what cotdd he do if he could not eat V* and he ^'^s kept alive
the fourteenth day by injections of a nutritive' character ; he screamed during ^^^^-i^
vulsions, and the noises he made were more like those of a dying man ; about ^^J^e^^X'
day he became insensible ; the convulsions, although very weak, continued till the i
teeuth dw[, "wiienlie died.--Oid you ascertain how long he had been affected wit^ ^ .^
threat ? Ue was by ^bMiness an omnttms conduiOtor ; he had been ill some few dsr^

NINTH DAY, May 23, 185«j. 2S9

might be a week ; he Iiad no oUier hart or iiQofy to his perioB of any kind which would
acooant for these symptoms; his body was not examined after death.

Lord CampshX.— What do yoa call the disease? I call it iaflammatoiy sore throat
from cohi aodexpoewe to the weather; the sysiptoms became tetanic in ecmsequenoe of
an extremely nerYons aad anxioas dispositioa; he had a '▼eiy large fiuoily, and was a
very hard-working man; I did not hear the eyidenoe of the witAeeses who described
the symptoHis of Mr. Cook.

Croas-ezanuned by the Attomey-Generai,

This is what is called idiopathic tetanus? Yes, decidedly so. I hare had a Tast
nmnber of cases of inflammatory sore-throats, and a great many anxious, nervous patients.
This is the only case I have ever seen of idiopathic tetanus. — ^if I rightly apprehend your
history of the symptoms, the disease was altogether progiessiye in its chancter; and
aithooffh there was an occasional remission of the more painful symptoms there never
was a full cessation of the symptoms ? He was not suffering from tetanic all^tion ; there
was a twitching of the muscles going on, but there was not that violent convuldon ; there
was an intermission of the violent symptoms, but still the twitchings going on more or
less: the lockjaw was the first of the more aggravated maptoms uat presented itself;
the muscular spasms about the trunk of the body progressing onwards to the extremities :
he was conscious until the tenth day, when insensibility supervened while the convul-
sions were upon him ; I consider the brain had been affected and congestion had taken
place, and that produced insensibility. — ^After that was there some diminution in the
severity of the convulsions? Very great diminution, but they still continued. — ^Would
that be likely to take place from ^e constant recurrence of the convulsions ? From the
constant recurrence of the convulsions the brain would be congested. — You would expect
to find a difference in that req>ect in a case where a man died very early in such a dis-
ease than if it were spread over a longer period ? That would depend greatly on the
Tiolence of the convulsions.

Lord Campbisll. — ^And the repetition? And the repetition.

Aajfoumed tSl Uhmhtow^ at 10 o'cioc^

KINTH DAY^S TEIAL.

May 23, 1856.

Mr. JOHN BROWN ROSS swohl— Examined by Mr. Grow,

You are house-surgeon to the London Hospital, I believe ? I am. — ^Do yon recollect
^recent case that was brought into the hospital? Yes.— When? On the 22nd of
March.— Will you state shortly what you saw of that case ? It was brought to the
hospital about half past seven in the evening, a man aged thirty-seven, a labourer ; he
had had qh^ paroxysm in the receiving room of o1ir hospital before I saw him ; he had
^ Tapid but feeble pulse, breathing quiddy though not laboriously ; the jaws were closed
&Bd fixed, there was an expression of anxiety about the countenance, and the features
^ere sooken ; he was unable to swallow, the muscles of the abdomen and back were
somewhat tense : after he had been in the ward about ten minutes, he had another
paroxysiQ and opisthotonos, which lasted about one minute ; he was then quiet for a few
^tttes, he had then another and died, he had only been in the hospital about half an
hour.— Was there an][ inquest held on the body ? There was.— Was the body examined ?
i; ^^' — ^Was any poison found ? None, the stomach was examined by Dr. Letheby. —
10 what do you attribute the cause of death? Tetanus.— How brought on? There
▼ere three wounds, two in the back of the right elbow about the size of a shilling each,
J^OQe of the left elbow about l^e size of a sixpence. The man told me he had had
J*»Bi about twelve or sixteen years.— Of what nature were they ? They were old chronic
^durated ulcers, ciroolar in ouUine, t&e edges thickened round, undermined and covered
with a dirty wliite coating without any graAulations^^What produced those ulcers?
^ hat I am anable to say.^-^lSaA you iorm an opinion of the nature of the disease at all ?
^have seen other wounds like them in different parts «f the body. — ^What were the other
^^ads that ymi flay you have seen liike tiiem ? I have seen old chronic syphilitic
^!^^ in the legs •noilar to those in the ribow, but I cannot say that these were so.—
^^^ ^>n>njj;ht on the tetanus? These wouads were the <»ly things to account for
Planus. There was no other cause found.

Q 2

240 TRIAL OF WILLIAM PALMER.

CixMs^xamined by the AtUimey-Oeneral,

His wife came with him ? She did. — ^Did yon learn from her whether anything had
been applied to this nicer ? A poultice, I beliere. — ^At what time, did yon hear, had the
poultice been applied 7 I think it was a day or two before, I am not certain. — Did ycm
happen to learn from her whether she had objected to the application of the particular
poultice ? I beliere she did ; she said so. — ^Did you ascertain what sort of poultice it had
been ? Linseed m<^. — If I caught aright what you said was, the jaws were completely
fixed when he came? They were. — So as to render him particularly .incapable of
swallowing anything ? Yes. — ^Did you learn from him when he had first been taken
with any symptoms about the jaws? He said at dinner that morning about eleven
o'clock. — Vo you know whether he had not said early in the day ? He told me dinner,
although he told my colleague breakfast. — Did he fix the same hour to both ? I do not
know the hour ; he told me dinner at eleven o'clock. — He told your colleague breakfast ?
Yes. — He was able to speak ? Yes. — ^Although he could not open his jaw ? Yes. — ^That
is the case, I believe, with cases of tetanus? Yes. — Were there also symptoms of
rigidity when he was brought in about the abdominal and lumbar muscles; did^you learn
from mm how long this rigidity had been coming on ? Not further than that the first
symptoms of the illness he had felt were that morning. — Do you know whether he had
told you how long he had felt this rigidity about the neck ? No, he did not say. — ^I
suppose his coming to the hospital was the first time that any medical man had any*
thing to do with tne case ? I believe another man had seen it ; I gathered from the
wife, the parish surgeon had. — ^At what time ? It was in the afternoon. — He was a poor
man ? Yes, a labouring man. — Is it the fact, as far as you gathered from her, that tbe case
in the afternoon had been such as to cause uneasiness, and to make them wishTor advice ?
Just so. — ^Have you any doubt, looking at the case from all this information and from
the s^ptoms, have you any doubt that the disease had been coming on from the
morning? I have no doubt at all. — ^Though you cannot speak as to the precise character
of these sores, were they ugly sores ? Yes, certainly ; sores of a chronic character. —
Ulcers ? Yes. — ^You say there were two on one elbow ? On the right elbow. — ^Abont the
size of a shilling each? Yes. — ^Were they perfectly running into one another? Yes,
they were, a piece of integument connected the two. — So that they would be likely
to run into one another eventually ? Yes. — ^You mentioned those sores were undermined ;
I am not sufficiently acquainted with your terms to know what that means ? I mean that
the wounds continued under the skin. — ^There were no signs of healing ? None. — Had
Ihey the appearance to you of having been neglected? They had.— Old neglected
sores? Just so. — ^Were they near the site of any particular nerve? They were. — ^The
ulnar nerve ? Yes. — ^Is that a sensitive nerve ? Very. — Connected with what we call
the '* funny bone " in common parlance ? Yes. — ^How soon, do I understand you, was
he seized with the first paroxysm after he came in ? He had one directly he came to
the hospital, but I did not see it. — ^And then I think you said half an hour from that
time he died? Yes. — ^Had he had any paroxysm berore he came to the hospital? I
believe he had, all the afternoon. — ^That was not one continuous paroxysm ? No. — ^You
say^ he had opisthotonos and convulsions of the muscles ; he had convulsions of the
ijuuscles of the legs and arms ? There Was a twitching of the muscles of the legs and
arms. — You say he died from tetanus ; what are the particular symptoms of Ae case to
which you refer as indicative of death by tetanus? From the tetanic symptoms and
from having wounds. — Put aside for the moment the fact of his having the wounds that
would lead to that inference, what were the symptoms that manifested themselves previous
to, or concomitantly with, death which you would call tetanic ? The tetanic symptoms
tTiere are the lock-jaw and the muscles of the abdomen and the back also being rigid ;
and he complained of pain in his stomach. — Do you mean internally? In the stomach,
just over the stomach. — ^Did you hear the account given of the symptoms of Mr. Cook's
death ? 'No, I did not.

Re-examined by Mr. Grove.

, Was strychnia suspected in this case before tl^e body was .examined? It was.

The Attomey-Qeneral, — Would an affection of the partieular nerve we have been
speaking of be peculiarly calculated to produce tetanus ? Decidedly.

Mr. Grove. — Are the nerves of the tongue very delicate nerves? Yes. — ^And the
throat and fauces ? There are very delicate nerves there..— Were you here yesterday
when a case was described of an injury in the throat ; a sore throat that cansed tetanog?
I was^ — ^Are you of opinion that an irritation of the nerves of the throat would cause
tetanus as well as the other nerves? That was produced by exposure to oold, it was
therefore idiopathic. — ^Would an injury to any delicate nerves be a cause of tetanus ?
Decidedly.

NINTH DAY, May 23, 1856. 241

Mr. RIVERS MANTELL sworn.— Examined by Mr. Gray.

Are you one of the surgeons of the London Hospital ? I am. — ^Did the case that has
been mentioned by Mr. Ross come under ^our care also ? It did. — ^Did you see it through
its progress ? I did, dnrin^ the time it was in the hospital. — Did you hear Mr. Ross
describe its sjouptoms ? I did. — Was that description accurate ? It was. — ^Did you also
hear him describe the wounds in the arm? I did. — ^According to your observation,
was that description also accurate ? I have said so. — ^What is the disease which he had ?
Tetanus. — Did you form a judgment as to what cause produced the tetanus ? I did. —
What ? The sores on the arm. — I think Mr. Ross stated the time he was in the hospital ;
do ^ott agree with him ? I do ; half an hour. — Is there anything which you observed
which you wish to add ? There is a little discrepancy about the time ; the man told me
himself they commenced whilst he was at breakfast, but he did not state the hour : to
Mr. Ross he said while he was at dinner, at 11 o'clock.

Dr. FRANCIS WRIGHTSON sworn.— Examined by Mr. Kenealey,

Were you a pupil of Liebig? I was.

Lord Campbell. — Where ? In Germany.

Mr. Kenealey. — ^And are ^ou an analytical chemist, and' teacher of chemistry at the
school of chemistry at Birmingham ? I am. — Ifi your chemical practice have you studied
the nature, and acquired a knowledge, of poison ? I have. — And have you been em-
ployed by the Crown in offences where poisoning is charged ? I have been engaged by
the Crown in a case for a prosecution.

Lord Campbell. — ^Employed as a witness? To detect the poison.

Mr. Kenealey. — Were you employed by the Crown to detect the supposed poison in
that case ? I was. — Have you made experiments in various poisons ? . I have. — And
amongst the rest strychnia ? I' have. — ^Have you found any extraordinary difficulties in
the detection of strychnia ? I have not found any extraordinary difficiUties in the de-
tection of strychnia. — In your opinion is it a poison detected by the usual tests ? Cer-
tainly, it is. — Have you discovered it in pure as well as in impure matter ? ^ I have de-
tected strychnia pure, and I have also discovered it when mixed with impurity, after
having separated it from the impurities. — Do you mean by impure, corrupted matter ?
I do.— -Can you enumerate any of the kinds of corrupted matter in which you have dis-
covered strychnia? I have detected it in the mixture of bile, bilious matter, from
putrefying blood. — Have you turned your attention to the question whether strychnia
can be discovered in the tissues ? I have ; it can. — Can you mention any case in whidi
you ha^e so discovered it ? I nave discovered it in the viscera of a cat poisoned by
strychnia ; also in the blood of a dog poisoned by strychnia ; also in the urine of another
dog poisoned by strychnia. — ^Have you heard the theory propounded by Dr. Taylor as
to tbe decomposition of strychnia b}r the act of poisoning ? I have. — ^Are you of opinion
strychnia undergoes decomposition in the act of poisoning? I am of opinion that it
does not.

Ix>rd Campbell. — In the act of poisoning or entering into the circulation ? Yes.

^r. Kenealey. — If it underwent such dissolution or change as that, would it be possible
to d^iscover it in the tissues ? If it underwent what ? — If it were decomposed in the act
of poisoning, would it be possible to discover it in the tissues? I should say not; it
would probably be changed into a substance in which it could be discovered. — ^Have you
ascertained by experiments in what minute quantities you can discover portions of
strychnia ? In extremely minute quantities indeed. — ^You mentioned two or three cases
in which you poisoned with strychnia, what were the doses you gave in those cases ?
The case I firet mentioned, the detection of strychnia in the blood, two grains were
given to the dog. — What portion did you give to the other animals? One grain was
eiven to the second dog in which we detected it in the urine. — ^And what to the cat ?
Half a ^in was attempted to be administered, but a considerable portion of it was lost,
was spilt. — ^Assumin^ that a man was j)oisoned by strychnia, and that his stomach
and a portion of his tissues were sent within eight, or nine, or ten days after death for
analytical examination, do you as a chemist say you could discover the poison of
strychnia in his remains ? I should have no doubt whatever in saying so.

Lord Campbell. — Generally if a nuin be poisoned by strychnia you would expect to
find it? Yes.

Mr. Serjeant Shee. — Do you confine it to generally? In the case stated by Mr.
Kenealey that if a man had certainly been poisoned by strychnia I should as certainly
expect to discover it.

Mr. Serjeant Shee, — Not generally, but certainly.

242 TKIAL OF. WILLIAM PALMER.

Croa^-ezamined by the Attomey-Qenerah

SappMe the whole of this posBon to be absorbed, where woidd you expect to find it?
In the blood. — Does it pas from the blood into the solids of the body ? Alkyir me to
explain here by passing into the solids of the'body ; I should nHher say it is lost in the
solids of the body. — What I mean to ask yoa is tlus : in hs progress to its final destim-
tion, the desftnietion of life^ does it pass from the blood, csr is it left by the blood in the
soUd tissnes of the body before it produces that effect ? I cannot telL— The sum and
subslance of what you say i« this; if it be present in the system you would find it in
the f^fstem ; if it be present in the blood you would find it in the blood ; if left by the
blood in the tissues yon* weald find it in the tissues : suppose it ha» passed from any
one of these stages into the other, then jou would no longer expect to find it ? I camot
say that.— Will you undertake to say, if it has passed from the stomaeh by the
absorbents in the blood, the whole dose, and passed into the ciievlation, would you
expect to find it ? Decidedly so. — If the whole dose were gone into the circulation?
Yes, because I believe it exists as strychnia in the blood. — ^Suppose the whole dose to
have been taken up by the absorbents, and passed into the circulation, do yott say yoa
would still expect to find any of it in the stomaeh ? Only that portkm; in order to be
absorbed it must be dissolved, and a portion of the fluid which surrounds the coots of
the stomach, in that portion which so surrounds the coat of the stomach, Ishoidd expect
to find it. — Suppose the whole to be absorbed ? Then I should not detect it. — Suppose
it has been eliminated from the blood and passed from the system ? If the whole (^ it
had passed, do you mean ? — Yes. Certainly not.

Lord CAMPBiax. — You would expect to find it elsewhere, not in the stomach?
Yes. — You would expect to find it in the blood ? In the blood and in the tissues.

The Aitomey-General. — ^My question only supposes the minimum of the dose thtt
will destroy life to have been given ; and supposing that to have been absorbed islo
the circulation and there deposited in the tissue^ or part of it eliminated by ^e actioa
of the kidneys, would you know where to search for it? I should search for it both in
the blood and in the tissues, and in the ^cta of the kidneys ; and f^om my eipen-
ments, I should expect to find it in each of tiiem, in case the urine was ^ected dunng
the time of poisoning.

Be-examined by Mr. Serjeant Sbee,

Supposing you knew a man to have been killed by the poison of strychnia, suppo*^
to be administered to him an hour and a half before he died, in your judgment wowQ
that certainly be detected in the stomach in the first instance ? Yes. — Supposing it to
have been administered in the shape of pills, would it by that time have been al^
absorbed and circulated in the system so as t^get out of the stomach? I cannot tell.-^
If it were so, I understand you, you would find it in the Woodj the liter, afld the spleeB-
Yes. — Could you form an opinion whether it could be detected under these ^^^^'
stances on thie coats of the stomach? Not knowing the idtose administered ^^*^t
powers of absorption, I cannot say with absolute certainty it would be detected, but
should thuik. it in the highest degree probable if a moderate dose had been adminis-
. tercdt — ^My question was on the coats of the stomach? Yes. — Could you form a^5_
opinion from the fact that death had taken place after one paroxysm, and in an nos
and a half after the ingestion of the poison, whether it was a considerable or an inc<*'
sider$iUe dose ? I cannot give a decided opinion.

Lwtl Campbell. — I cannot allow. this ^ntlemanto leave the box without expres&*"S
my high approbation of the manner in which he has given his evidence.

Mr. Baron Axdsrsox. — How do you suppose strychnia hills when it is *^^^/Ji,g
the sy«tfm? I cannot form the subtest opinion. — It goes ^m the stomach into .^
blood, and from the blood somewheiw else; and on asrivivg at that somewhere ^^,
kills : could you determine, without examining ihe whole of the body, where ^ ^*^^
I should -think, by an cxamiaatiooi of the blood> as well as the stomaeil, that I ^^r^ ^q
satisfy myself of its presence* — It .goes into the bloody and then goes somewhere etee ^
kill : if it is absorbed, where should you expect to find it ? Iliat i» a pcnnt ^^^^?
•cannot speak. — Does it not result you cannot tell «Dless you examine' tile whols Dooy
Not precisely, it ought to be found in the bloods

Mr. RICHARD PARTRIDGE, sworn.— Examined by Mr. ^rore, ^

You have been for many years in practice as a surgeon, I believe? I ^^^^C^i-tfe?

?ou had an extensive practice? Yes. — ^Are you professor of anatomy at King's ^y, A9
Rm. — Have you heard the evidence in this question as to the symptoms of Mr« ^.i^^
'^e. — And as to the post-mortem examination ? I have. — Did you hear that P^ ^
' evidence which mentioned the examination of the spine ? I* did. — ^Whftt 1^ ^

. KINTH DAT, lUr 28^ 1856^ ^^

opiiuon as to tiie BeoMnty in a caae of ccnvnUiBuift of exaaiinjig the sjdnal oord afttr
death ? Of course li is most imsortant. — ^Did jroii haar Hui statement as to the gnhty
granules that were found ? I did. — ^Would such graaiiales be Ukelijr to cause intenoMilien
ii the arachnoid membrane? They would.-— Would suiihi infiammaftion haye baeft^i-
ooverable if the epinai cord had been enamiafd shottly after death? It would ; parhaips
joa would allow me to add to the spinal oord its membranes : I incfaided them in my
mind though I did not mention theoL.— If examined nine weeks a£ter, would it be likely
t& be discovered ? It woi^ not— Would sueh inflammation, if it existed, of the granules,
would that be capable of ]»roducing tetaoilenn oonvulsioas ? I haye not seen such a. can,
but such cases are umfeuhtedlj ou records — Is there a medical term for sueh inflammation
of the arachnoid ? Yes, menmgitis, or inflammatiQu of the membrane ; arachnitis or mc-
siagitis sometimes. — Does that diswder produce convulsiosuB. and death ? It does ; I
should say. not universally, it sometimes does not result in death. — ^Spasms of the muscles ?
Yes. — Opisthotonos ? Yes, — Could you form any opinion of the case you have heard as
to the cause of death?

Lord Campbell. — ^What case ?

Mr. Grove. — Mr. Cook's case ; could you form any judgment as to the cause of death
in Mr. Cook's case? I could not form any positive judgment. — You have heard the evi-
dence as to the state of contraction after death ? I have. — Could you form any judgment
as to whether that is an ordinary feature ; are you aware deaths from natural causes
sometimes present the same features ? There is every variety in that respect ; bo con-
chision can be liwmed of the degree of contraction, or the kind of eontraction, tlmt I
heard described.

Lord Camwsell. — ^By no conclusion^ do yo« meaa no inference aA aJl ? None.

Mr. Grove. — From the contracted state of the body after death ? Exactly ; I speak
merely with reference to the symptoms I heard desciribed during this case. — Supposing
that the body after death is contracted and rigid, and that there is a great degree of
rigidity, m^y that not afford an inference that he died £rom tetaous without at all knowing
that he was poisoiied ? If I find the back curved and the body restiiug on its back a^d
feet after death, I should infer that he died of that form of tetanus which convulses the
maseks of the ba^k. — You would suppose he died from tetanus ? Yes. — You wsn^ ^oiia^
to sfl^ every variety of form or eveiy variety of rigidity ? Various degrees and varieties
o£ rigidity occur after a natural death. — The clenching of the hands or the semi-bendiog
of the feet, is that uncommou in cases of ordinary death ? Very commonly ; the haJ^-
hent hand and fingers are not uucommou in natural death.— The arching of the feet, is
that not unusual ? The feet are generally pointed, with a degree of arching, though from
this description I should say rather more than usimL

Lord CAMPBEUi.r~Yott. are asked as to arching of the feet ? Archioig of the feet is miet
with no(t u&fre(}uently.

Cross-examined by the Attomey-Oenercd.

Where did you understand these granules, from which ^ou say arachnitis might ha^e
proceeded, were situate in the dead man ? If I understood nghtly , they were situatidd in the
inner surface of the fibrous investment of the cord. — In the inn«r surfhce ? I undei«toad
so.— Are the granules in the human subject occasionally fouad in these parte ? Do I
understand you as a healthy appearance ? — ^Take it either way ? Not commonly. — They
^re symptoms ? They are symptoms.-^I think I understood you to say that a^tachttitis,
producing convulsions, has never come under yowrown personal obserTatioB ? Y<ciS/^-Has
this disease, arachnitis, come under your obMrvation without prodncieg coi>v«d»D»s F-^It
lias not satisfactorily.— -It is a very rare disease? It is ra*e>— You. say theris a^ re«oi5d«d
<^as€s of it ; are you enabled to state from those reoovded eases the oouise of the sjpjRupAoins
of the disease ? No.-*Do not you know it to be a disease of considerable dmratiftn.? The
<^es have varied in diiEatioo.-^What about has been the period of the maxiipiuin andihe
odnimum ? CoramtHdy days, at the shortest— Is it accoaqpaaued with paraJiysis ?— If thoy
live.-^Does it produce ai!^ effect upon the brain by sympathy ? Not manifestly-t-^Ifew
^ yott mean ? Not reeogmaabte after death. — ^Does it produce any e£Seet oa the .brain
z^ot prior to deatik ?^~-I do mt q^ite understand tiie question. — Would it, considering tiK
connexion that there is between the spinal covd aikd the brain, would it a^c^ the brain
*>y sympathy, or othftFwxM, prior to death ? No.— Do you happen to know whether it is
attended with loss of sensibikity before death ? I do not.— In these coses, wheie granules
have producod aracfanstis, do you happen to know whether the granuks hftve been eon-
Mdend>le in point of siae? — It has varied in di&rent cases. — Suppose them to be very
SBKall and minute ? I showld think there would be less likelihood of their producing
lailammatiom. — ^Sufqfkose au cxtiminatioii after deati^L, at a lionger interval than iao« days

244 TBUL OF WILLIAM PALH£R.

after death, failed to detect the presence of the inflammation of the arachnoid ; supposing
the examination to take place at a longer period after death, that the appearance of the
spinal cord and its integuments had not undergone any decomposition, and that the
appearance was perfectly healthy, should you be warranted in inferring there was
innammation ? — I think so ; I should not conclude there was inflammation. — You find it
in its complete form, and find no trace of an inflammation of the spinal cord ; you wo«M
not feel yourself warranted in inferring it ? Certainly. — I will put another period short
of decomposition : supposing the .body examined, and the decomposition had not com-
menced, and in fact no trace of inflammation in that part, would you be wrong in
inferring any? You are putting an impossible question: the spinal cord would D«t
remain in its integrity after that period.

Lord Campbell. — The limit of time is prior ,to decomposition ; that is ;f our
terminus.

The Attorney •General, — Suppose in that case you see no inflammation, would you be
warranted in inferring it ? No. — Now, this examination was made, you know, by four
medical men ; should you be of opinion that they would be competent judges as to
whether decomposition had taken place?

Mr, Serjeant Shee objected to the question.

The Attorney-General, — I think you said that the shortest period that the arachnitis
•occurred was a matter of days ? That is my impression. — Does it not sometimes extend
to a matter of months ? Where the dose does not kill. — I am speaking even of where it
extends to death ? Not unless it terminates in palsy.

Lord Campbell. — You »re asked how long it might last? It might go on for
months.

The Attomet/'OeneraL — ^Does it not affect the patient by a series of convulsions at
recurring intervals ? That varies. — ^Did you ever know, or did you ever hear of or
read of a case in which the patient died alter a single convulsion of arachnitis ? Not a
single one. — ^What would be the concomitant symptoms ; would it affect the rest of the
patient, or affect the general health ? I cannot say.^Do you believe that a man could
nave twenty-four hours of complete repose ? No. — ^What, in your judgment, would be
likely to be the symptoms produced, independently of convulsions, by inflammation of
the spinal cord* I have no personal knowledge. — ^What would you a priori expect to find
from such a disease ? Great pain. — Where ? • In the back sometimes ; but I have no
professional knowledge. — I am wanting to see what we may admit ; what would be d
priori the symptoms you would expect besides the convulsions which, you say, may pro-
ceed from arachnitis ? Pain and spasm and palsy. — Palsy would come on last, taking the
natural course ; supposing convulsions occurred, in the intervals between those convulsions
would the health of the system be in any degree effected ? I am not aware. — Can you form
no judgment ? I cannot answer that. — In the interval between the convulsions could he be
quite well ? No. — What would be the matter with him ? Pain and uneasiness. — Pain and
uneasiness where ? According to where the convulsions were situated, according to the
situation of the muscles convulsed; the back usually. — You would not expect complete re-
pose from convulsions for a period of twenty-four hours ? I should not. — You have heard
the symptoms, and I presume you have heard from the midnight of Monday till Tuesday
Mr. Cook had complete repose ; I now ask you if, in the face of the Court and of the
profession, you will undertake to say that Mr. Cook's death proceeded from arachnitis ?
I should think not ; the majority of the syiiiptoms do not show arachnitis. — Yon men-
tioned that there were one or two of the appearances after death in Cook's case, which
would be common to other cases, the semi-closing of the hand : did you ever know, except
in a case of tetanus, the hand is completely clenched* sb (itiit^retting itf), so as to require
force to take the fingers away ftrom the^ hand ? Nd, I do not-*-Have you ever known it
happen in a ewe of idiopathic or traumatie tetanus ? Clenching the hand ? — Have yon
ever known the hand fio/dlnehed that the^JiDgcvs weve bent down into the hands ; have
you ever known 4hat in 'idiopathic tet&mts;? ' ri have neverseen a case of idiopathic tetanus.
-^Traumatic tetaiQus; Isuppose yoa have^seeti; »cas& of traumatic ; did you ever know the
hand so clenched in traumatio) tetanus? J/lulnre seen .the hand clenched completely to
that extent. — ^Have you seen thehaodHcAmpletdLy clenched like that {ilhtstrating)? Not
so much as that.^So as- to ireqaxrei foneettoopen the fingers of the hand? They oflen
require a great deal of force to be fitradghteiked.-^Oneword on arching of the feet ; you say
the arching of the feet occasionally 'takes jdace'in death? It does; I have noticed it-^
Have you ever known the feet to be so distorted as to be described by a medical maa as
assuming the form of a club foot? Never.-^Did you hear the description given by Mj^«
Jones, that when this man died the body was bowed, so that, if he had turned it from its

NINTH DAY, Mat 23, 1856. 246

side upon its baek, it would have rested on its head and on its heels ? I did. — Have you.
any donbt that that indicates death from tetanus ? Not from that form of tetanic symp-
toms. — Are yon acquainted irith the symptoms that accompany death from tetanus
resulting from the administration of strychnia? Only by reading and hearsay. — ^From
your knowledge of the subject, having attended to the symptoms described by Mr. Jones
fh}m the moment the paroxysm set in of which Mr. Cook died, and the symptoms and
appearances attending nis death, does it appear that those symptoms are consistent with
death by strychnia? Some are consistent and some are inconsistent — ^Tell which are
inconsistent? The long interval which occnrred after the taking of the poison. — ^What I
am asking you is, whether these symptoms, from the time the man was taken with the
paroxysms of convulsions of the muscles of the trunk, of the legs, and of the arms — the
bending of the body into a bow — the diffiqulty of respirations-
Mr. Serjeant Shee, — ^You must take the beating with the hands and the sitting up.

Mr. Attomey'General, — They do not occur on the Tuesday night : I am fixing him to
the symptoms described by Mr. Jones, whether these symptoms are consistent with what
you know of death by strychnia? Quite. — ^You have known cases of traumatic tetanus:
from your own experience, do you agree in the description that has been given by various
witnesses that the symptoms come on gradually and progressive ; that« although they are
remitted, the diG|^ase is never wholly intermittra ? I do. — What is the shortest period in
which you have ever known the disease of traumatic tetanus run its course to death ?
Never under three or four days, within my experience. — Suppose a case could be de-
scribed as of shorter duration, such as a day or a few hours, would your medical expe-
rience lead you to infer that the premonitory symptoms had very likely been neglect^ ?
I should consider that probable. — You had never, if I understand you, witnessed a case
of death from strychnia either in animals or in human life? Never a complete case. — I
will ask you this before I sit down : bearing in mind the distinction between traumatic
and idiopathic tetanus and a case such as has been here described, I take the liberty of
asking you, in the whole course of your experience or knowledge have vou ever seen
such a death as this, with the symptoms that have been mentionea, proceed from natural
causes ? — No,

Re-examined by Mr. Grove,

You were going to state, when you were stopped, those symptoms that you con>
sidered inconsistent with strjrchnia ; go on and mention, with regard to the sym-
ptoms, those which you consider inconsistent ? The sickness.

Lord Campbell. — Manifested when ? Before the attack came on ; the beating the
bed-clothes with the arms, want of sensitiveness to external iipapression, and the sudden
cessation of the convulsions, and apparent complete recoveiy ; I think those are the
principal parts. — You mentioned previously that the time that occurred was between the
ingestion of the poison and the coming on of the symptoms ? Yes ; I have mentioned
that point of time between the time when the supposed poison was administered. —
And the paroxysm coming on ? Yes. — What inference do you deduce fh>m that? That
it is inconsistent with strychnia.

Mr. Grove. — As to the mode in which it came on without premonitory symptoms,
do you consider that is inconsistent with strychnia ? There was apparently an absence
of the usual condition that is described. — You stated to mj £iend the Attorney-General,
that the bent form indicated some tetaniform symptom ; did that answer apply as well to
natural tetaniform as to tetaniform by strychnia? Yes. — ^The bent form of the feet
indicated tetanic spasm ; would that be the case whether it was a tetaniform spasm with
poison or without poison ? No doubt

Lord Campbell. — And the other symptoms of rigidity ? It is rather a question of
degree. — ^They would be more violent if from poison ? No doubt.

Mr. Grove, — ^Do the symptoms of disorder in the spine vary considerably in their
character in different cases ? I only know by reading they do vary. — In their degree of
violence? Yes. — In the periods of intermission? Yes. — ^And in the nature of the
muscles affected? Yes. — Now, you have stated in the cases of tetaoras yoti have seen
there was no intermission of'the disease : do you know, from your- reading, that the in-
termission of the disease is a frequent thing ? I knqw it occurs, bat it is not frequent.
— You were asked as to the period at which death came on in arachnitis ; do yon know
that there are cases in which the* death frvn that disease took place in a period of 18
hours? I do not remember tfaat.<— Can you tell me whether fbnr hours is not an un-
common time ? That I do not bear in mind. — ^You have stated that such ^nules ss ave
described are unusual; are they more unusual in young people than m old people?
More unusual.— Are they more indicative of disease when seen in young people than in

246 TBIAL OF WILLUM PALMER.

old ? I cannot tell tbat — You wete asked a qoettioi^ whidi you nod was an impMible
one, as to the decompositioa; do yon know of any case in ▼hieh the agme would preserve
its integrity as Long as nine weeks ? I do not. — Yon were asked whether yon woold &el
yourself justified m inlerring that there was disease firoia the exaaunatifHi ; would you
feel yourself justified in saying that there wa& no disease ? I should not.

Lord GAMPBttLL. — Suppose you saw the spine with no decompoeitioB in its integrity,
and you saw no signs of infiammaJtion^ would you infer diat he had any at the- ttme of
death ? I should not.

Mr. Orom. — ^What is the usual period at which decomposilaoft sets in ? It varies rery
much ; from a few hours to a few days.

Lord Campbeix. — ^According to the temperature? According to the temperature,
and various things.

Mr. Orove. — ^Do you think it at all in the least improbable that it could remain fornine
weeks undecemposed ? I do not.

The Attorney-General. — I have one question which, with your Lordship's permission,
I would put (this gentleman spoke as to the vomiting) : whether, if the stomach had been'
brought by any other cause into a state of irritation by any other means, would he think
those causes inconsistent ?

Lord Campbell. — I intended to put the question myself.

Wiiness, — ^I should tlunk it not inconsisteul;.

MB. JOHN GAY sworn.— Examined by Mr. Gray.

You are a Fellow of the Boyal College of Surgeons ? I am. — Have you been for the
last eighteen years a surgeon of the Eoyal Free Hospital ? I was for between seventeen
and eighteen years ; I have ceased to be so for two years. — Had you under your care or
observation a case of idiopathic tetanus in a boy ? 1 had a case ; it was in the year 1843.

Lord Campbell. — ^What was his age ? Eight years old.

Mr. Gray, — Was that a case in the hospital? It was. — Was he under your care froai
the commencement of the case, or was he brought in ? He was brought in during the
time he was ill. — About what time elapsed from the time he was brought till he died ?
May I refer to the notes ? it is so many years since ; I took rough notes of the case at
the time ; it was brought in on the 29th of July ; the accident occurred a week before he
• was brought in. — During the- first three days he had the usual paroxysms in the disease?
He had them unusually severe during the first three days I saw him ; I saw him on the
^th of July ; he could not open hi& month at that time ; he comphdned of great pain and
stiffness about the neck.

Lord Campbell. — Had he any spasm? Burmg the first night of his admission he
started up convulsed, and spasmodically elosed his jaw ; during the following night he
was a ffood deal eonvulsed at tunes ; the abdominal muscles, as well as the muscles of
the neck and ba«k, had become n^d during the night ; the muscles of the face were
also in a state of greieit eontraction ; on the felfowing day I found the muscles remained
in the same state ; in the morning of that day at 2 o'clock on visiting him I found there
wma mueh rigidity of the mnucles, especiaUy those of the abdomen and back ; the fol-
lowing morning the muscular rigidity had gone; he opened h« moitth as usual and was
able to tajk ; the. lad apipeaved to he thonougkly v^ieved • he iMbd no. return of the spasms
until the foiAawmg ^tacy: at that time he asked the name to change his linen, and she
was lifting him up in bed to do so when violenit oonwulsioneof the anus and fttce cameoOt
and he died in a few mixKites.

Mr. Gray, — From the time at which the convulsions of which he died came on and Ae
last preceding convulsions, what time elapsed ? I sheukl say, about thirty hours : it would
be difficult to say exactly. — ^How lon^did the last paroxysms hist before he died ? A few
minutes.— Before that paroxysm came on, had the vigidity which you describe been com-
pletely relieved ? Completely. — Can you tell whether the nurse was putting on his line^
M ^ time he was coixvulsed ? It was paerely the act of Uftipg him up in bed for that
purpose.^ — In this case,., had you given the patient euy thing to produce vomiting ? I had.

Lord Campbkll^ — ^What did you give him m oider topnodveevov^iBg^ Tartar
^eBetie.r— Whieh day? The aecOBd day I g«ve smaM doses of tartar emetio,. aad they
prodoeed no e£Sset.(~i>idi Hae doaes take msy efleetl They predBeed no effiwt; 1
repeated them in lacgec doatt. — ^What weetthe eflfect? They psednfled no effect ; two
grains ef taxtar emetic I gvre to m child otf eight yearS'Old^-^-Yott did not- repeat it after
the third dey? l!io.

Crosa-oEsamined by the Jitomey^GvMral.

We have not; heard, and i think it is dei^fftble we shoutdi, what was the aet^deat ? It

NINTH I>AY, May 23, 1856. M7

was aa accidoat by irhieh tkcloe wtm smaslMd.— A Ivrife ttose bad ftUen on the middle
of the left fbot, aad had eompletely smashed it 7 Tea. Had the wound become very
unhealthy ? Yes, ▼ery ninek so. — In fust, when first yoa saw H, it had portions of bone
and cartilage adhering to tlMfsnrlace? It had. — Did you «mp«tate the toe? I did. —
At the time he was broag;hl to yon, I think yon hare told «s the motfMr said he oould
not open his mouth so wide as usual? That I think first attneAid. ti^t aother's
attention. — When you saw him was the month closed up, or almost closed up ? Almost
closed up. — ^I see July a9th he sl^pS but little during the night, and during sleep started
up convulsed, and spasmodically closed the jaw ; the jaw*remained closed during the
time? Until the 1st of August. — When you administered tartar emetic to him, was
the jaw closed at the time ? Yes. — How did yon manage to get it into his mouth? In
all those cases so trifling a remedy as the tartar emetic is easily given.

Lord Campbell. — The tongue seems to retain its powers? Yes; the ease is
recorded in * The Lancet.'

Mr. Attomey^Getieral. After that, the 29th of July, did the convulsions oontinae

throughout the 30th and part of the 31st ? The convulsions' came on during the night,
and they appear to have remitted during the da^,. except a muscular ri^dily; the
tetanus did remain. — ^Bat were there no spasms during the day-time ? I believe not. —
Xn the day-time, although there were no convulsions, were the mascles of the body, of
the chest, and of the abdominal back and neck, all rigid ? Yes. — Did that contiBiie
throughout the two days you administered tartar emetic ? Yes. — ^Would the rigidity of
the muscles and of the stomach prevent sickness? It would, I have uo doubt, go far to
prevent it. — ^What are called the abdominal muscles ? T said it would go for to prevent
It. — If rigidity of those muscles had not set up, you entertained no doubt that your
tartar emetic would have produced its effect ? I expected the boy would have vomited
from so large a dose. — ^You have no doubt h would have done so except from the
rigidity of file muscles ? I suppose it would have done so. — When did the symptoms
begin to abate? On the 1st of August, on the fourth day, and they gradually subsided;
they appeared to have subsided during the night ; I saw the child during the middle of
the day, and ! found that it had sub»ded, and in fact had entirely gone off. — Yoa
thought, I suppose, he was going to get well ? I £d. — You told us the woman set him
up in bed for the purpose of diaiiging his linen ; would that in any way have brought
the toe, that part tiist had been attacked, mbo any frietiofli with some parts of the bed ?
No, I think not ; it must have doae so, oeitainly ; but 1 do aoS thiak it would have any
effect, the simple irritotiaii of the toe at that part. — Bat there not having been in yotnr
judgment from the oommancenent nervous irritation set «p fmm the original seat of the
disease, can you account in any way for the nervous or mascular disease of tetanus? ^ If
the cause had not entiiaiy gone, the symqertoms were brought ba^ lif^ the act of sitting
up ib bed. — ^What do you suppose die oaase to hmre been f My imprsssien is there must
be some action about <^ spinal ccMrd as the hnaiedittte eause of the syn^toais.' — Action
set up in the spinal oovd by irritation of tiie nerves in the iauoediale sita of the laeeratkm
or ^wound ? Quite so. — May it not be reasonable to infer that any imtation of the part
originally injured,. exeiUng and irritating the nerve or the nerves connected with the
part, may support its action over the whole system, and so produce ooaTuIsion? I
had removed the end of the diseased .part,, so I cannot conceive that the same cause could
exist. — If you imagine you feel yourself justified m saying that the irritation of the
spinal cord onx;e set up continues, why should you infer that the irritation of the nerve
may not also continue ? There must .he some peculiar irritation of tl^e nerve to ^ve rise
to the affection of the spinal cord from which tetanus arises, when also it would be more
frequently produced ; th^e appear to be some particular circumstances which produce
it. — You have no doubt the state of the toe was the original cause of the coovulsioaa?
I have not. — ^And that death took place by something or other distinct from the: first
cause ? Yes.

Se-examined by Mr.. Gray.

I think you told my friend that, with regard to the convulsions which end in death,
you thought it. arose from some irritation set up in the spinal cord ? I did. — You- said,
from that and other causes ? Yes* — ^May the causes of such irritation be very various in
different cases ; the cause of the irritation in the spinal cord which would end in tetani-
form may be very varioBS ? I thiak so.—4)o you- think it is possible, merely from a
death wHh symptoms of a tetmifoim charaoter^ 'do you think it is possiUe, fhrni the
denervation yoa have had, to aseribe them to any particular cause: suppose in one you
have a death accomiNinied with tetanifbrm symptoms and opisthotonos, and the various
symptoms of a tetanic charaefter, in the absence of any knowkdge of the ease, therefore —
of the cause you state, probacy the irritatiaa of the spinid eonl---in the absence of know-

248 TRIAL OF WILLIAM PALMER.

ledge of the ca«e, do yon think it is posnble to ascribe them to any particolar cause ?
I think it would be extremeW difficult to do so. — Will jou giye me the proposition you
lay down ? In the event of a given set of symptoms, tetanic symptoms I should say,
being proposed, it would be extremely difficult, if not impossible, without some other
eridenoe, or collateral evidence, to assign it to any given disease.

Lord Campbell. — Or cause ? Or cause.

Dr. WILLIAM 'MCDONNELL sworn.— Examined by Mr. KeneaUy.

Are you a licentiate of the College of Surgeons at Edinburgh ? I am. — How long
have vou been in practice ? About eight years. — And during that time have you had
considerable experience at home and abroad? Tes. — Have you had practical as well as
theoretical knowledge of tetanus, idiopathic and traumatic ? Yes. — How many cases of
idiopathic tetanus have you seen ? Two cases. — In addition to those, have you made
tetanus a subject of medical research ? Yes. — Now what kind of irritation do you assign
as usually producing tetanus; what sort of nervous irritation; would it proceed from
veij slight causes r Yes, very. — ^Will you entmierate some of those slight causes
which will produce strong tetanic convulsions ? Almost any internal disorder or alter-
ation of the internal secretions Vill produce idiopathic tetanus. — Would exposure to cold
or damp produce it ? Yes. — Would mental excitement produce it ? Yes, it would be a
probable cause.

Lord Campbell. — Without any organic disturbance ? Mental excitement will cause
an organic disturbance. — ^Mental excitement would be the proximate cause of tetanus ?
Yes.-— Have you ascertained whether the presence of grit^ particles or granules in any
portion of the body would produce tetanic convulsions ? They might in any part con-
nected with the nervous structure in either the spine or the brain : I have seen small
deposits or tubercles in the brain; the only assignable cause for death terminating in
convulsions. — You say you have seen a case of that kind ? Yes. — In addition to those
slight causes you have mentioned, do you believe that tetanic convulsions arise from
causes that are as yet quite undisooverable by human science ? Quite. — Your opinion
in fact is, it is a disease the true origin of which is involved in deep mystery.

The Attomey'General. — ^That is rather a mysterious way of putting the question.

Mr, Kenealey. — Does. your Lordship think that the question is objectionable? I will
put it in this way, at all events : is there some obscurity ? I have had many post-
mortem examinations of patients who have died of tetanus, and no trace of any disease
whatever could be discovered beyond the congestion or vascularity of some of the vessels
surrounding the nerves. — ^Though tetanus is not easily discoverable, is strychnia disco-
verable by scientific men ? Very easily. — ^Allow me to call your attention to a case of
idiopathic tetanus of your own : do you remember the case of the female, Catherine
Watson, who is here ? Yes, — You were fortunate enough, I believe, to restore her, and
she is here ? Yes.— Will you tell us, if you please, the symptoms of that case ? Had
I better read the notes ?

Lord Campbell. — ^Are they made at the time? This is a copy of them. {Dr,
McDonald read his notes of the case of Catherine Watson.)

Mr. Kenealey, — ^In that case was there no trismus ? Yes, I have mentioned here the
lock-jaw set in.— There was a lock-jaw ? Yes.— When did it set in ? I cannot exactly
say ; I think it was about 12 or 1 o'clock, but about the middle of the attack ; she was
able to speak. — In acute idiopathic tetanus does trismus usually set in in the middle or
end of the attack ? If it is a very acute attack it is generally a later symptom. — ^In an
attack ending fatally you would expect it to be a later symptom ? : Yes. — Had you a patient
who died from a convulsive attack of this kind ? Yes.— ^V^hat was his name ? Copeland.

Lord Campbell. — Would you call it idiopathic or traumatic tetanus ? It must have
been idiopathic tetanus. — ^There was no external cause ? No.

Mr. Kenealey. — ^In what time did the death take place ? Somewhat less than half an
hour: I cannot say precisely ; the patient was dead before I could reach the house.

Lord Campbell. — Do you know what the cause of the disease was ? Yes, I ex-
amined the patient carefully, and made inquiry as to the symptoms.

Mr. Kenealey, — ^Have you made a number of experiments on animals with' reference
to strychnia poison ? I have. — Have you found the post-mortem symptoms generally to
concur ? Very generally. — We will take the brain first : in what condition have you
generally found the brains of these to be ? The muscles of the brain highly congested,
the sinuses gorged with blood, and in one case I had hmmorrhage from the nostrils —
Would that indicate a very high state of congestion ? Yes, I have found extravasation

NINTH DAY, May 23, 1856. 249

of the blood in some cases likewise in the brain. — ^Ha^e yon cut through the sabstance
of the brain ? Yes. — ^Did you find any peculiarity in it ? Numerous red points.

The Attomey'Qeneral, — Is this one particular case, or the general result? The
general resnlt ; I will read you a list of 12 1 haye here.

Mr. Kenealey. — ^Is there any other peculiarity with reference to the brain that attracted
your attention, or have you 6omprised all ? I think I have comprised all. — Now we will
go to the lungs : in what condition have you found the lungs of those animals ? Either
oollapsed or congested. — How have you found the heart? Invariably filled on the right
side with blood, and very often on the left. — Now we will go to the liver : what has been
the state of the liver in those animals ? Congested. — The kidneys ? Normal generally. —
That means healthy ? Healthy. — ^The spleen ? Normal generally. — ^In their ordinary
oondition ? Yes. — In what state have you found the vessels of tiie stomach on the outer
surface ? Congested. — And on the mucous or inner surface, what state ? Highly vascular.
— What is the meaning of vascular ? Vessels filled with red blood. — ^With red blood ?
Florid or red blood, causing a red or inflamed appearance, deeper in some places than in
others. — In what state have you found the spinal cord ? The vessels congested ; the
vessels of the membranes congested, and also red points seen on cutting it through, not
invariably, but sometimes. — Are these symptoms on post-mortem examination, or are they
always a true test of the cause of death ? No, not idways. — Generally ? Appearances
jou mean. — Appearances ? Yes, some symptoms are a different thing altogether. — ^We
"will come to your analytical experiments for the discovery of strychnia: have you
experimented in many cases for the discovery of strychnia? A great many. — What is
the smallest portion of strychnia that you can discover in the stomach of an animal ?
You may discpver the smallest dose that will kill the animal ; if you kill an animal with
a grain of strychnia you may discover traces of it.

Lord Campbell. — ^May I take it that if ever an animal was killed by strychnia, that
strychnia might be discovered? Yes.

Mr. Kenealey, — What do you mean by a trace of it? Evidence of its appearance. —
I>oes that mean an imponderable quantity ? It may. — Do you mean by traces to convey
the idea that you can discover the smallest (Quantity ? That will kill. — ^Do you confine
it. to the smallest part that will kill : what )s the smallest quantity you can discover ?
T'he fifty-thousandth part of a grain. — Have you actually experimented so as to discover
tlnat quantity ? Yes. — You have heard a theory in the course of this inquiry which has
b«en propounded by Dr. Taylor to your knowledge ; has that been provide4 for ? No.

The Attomey-QcneraL — ^What theory?

Mr. Kenealey, — ^The theory that I call Dr. Taylor's ; I mean the destruction by the

supposed decomposition of strychnia : to your knowledge, has any scientific man of

eminence ever propounded that theory at all ? No. — ^When did you first ascertain that

that theory had been propounded by any one ? In this Court. — Speaking scientifically,

in your opinion is there any well-grounded reason for that theory ? None whatever. —

Now will you state the grounds on which you, as a man of science, have come to that

conclusion ? I have proved it by numerous experiments ; I have proved that that theory

is false by the numerous experiments : I have taken the blood of an animal poisoned

with two grains of strychnia, about the least quantity which would kill all animal, and

have injected it into the abdominal cavities of some animals, and have destroyed them,

with the symptoms and post-mortem appearances of strychnia: I can read you a few of

tiiose experiments, if your Lordship pleases. — Does that contain a summary of the proofs

to your own satisfaction that you have disproved that theory ? I have made numerous

experiments in different wrys, andPhad thien' known it.— When strychnia is administered

in. the form of pills, is it mitut easy, or more difficult to detect ? I should think it woiild

mtJEe no difference: if the ]bills were hai^, and not readily solved, you wt>uld find it

much easier, because you mig^t find. some ^mains of the pill. — Would its administration

in pills have the effect of keeping its parts together, and thereby facilitating its discovery ?

By keeping it together, and preventing it from being dissolved, and you might find some

remains more easily. — ^Have you, teira!>i!hat Dr. Taylor said^ was hip opinion about the

fallacy of colour tests? I have. — ^Do yoii^agree with him itf that opinion? I do not. —

Do you believe that a colour test is a reliable Mode of ascertaining strychnia ? It is. —

Did you hear Mr. Herapath say that' h* h!tL(L found it inurinfe'that had been rejected?

I have found it invariably .--Do*8!rt' first' pAS«4tito the*blc«6d, and then info that watery

tttcretion ? Patt of it ttay be dfa*m^off *y that- means. — Is it true that strychnia can be

confounded with pyrd*anthine ? No,--~ih mese animals which you killed with strychnia,

did you observe anything with refisrence' tb saliva ? 'Yes, generally an increased flow of

saliva. — Was that a very markM symptom ?' Very. — ^Have you observed any peculiarity

with regard to thosfe creatured Vheif they w*re touched ? They were very susceptible of

2S0 TBIAL OF WILLIAM PALMfiE.

touch : a stamp of the foot, s riig^ touch, or a breath or a fiharpirocd, nEoaid driye them
into rnmmlflMtiii — What sort St a eooTiilnoB? Tetanie cooTvlsioiis : we reeogaised
them by Ibe stnoghtsned condition of the iMndes. — ^Was that a marki^ oonvnlnon ? Yes.
— Soppoeing that a dose of strychnia sufficient to kill a man irere administered to him,
do you think he could bear to have his neck rubbed ? I think it would drive him into
conyulsions. — ^Before the paroxysms came on ? Yes; it would be T«ry likely to throw
him into convulsions before the paroxysm came on.

Lord Camsvell. — As soon as the poison is taken ioto his system ? No ; it requires
a certain time*-~It would be after a certain time P You. must have the first symptoms
of poison developed first. — ^That would be after the firat symptom ? Yes.

Mr. KeneaUy. — That would not giy« him any kind of relief? I do not think so,
judf ing from what I have seen. — ^What would be the effect of a man pulling a bell
vi^ntly, if he was poisoned by strychnia? I think it would be extremely probable,
if the dose had been sufficient, to destroy life, provided the symptoms had made their
appearances; always prennaing that. — Do yon agree with Mr. Herapath, if a sufficient
dose to poison has been administered, it can and ought to be discorered ? I quite agree
with that — Hove you heard the evidence that was given in this case; medical evi-
dence? I hav«« — The evidence as to the symptoms? Yes; the symptoms I attach
very little importance to as the means of diagnosis, as you may have the same sym*
ptoms developed from many different caases. — ^Any other reason ? Not witii regard to
the symptoms. — ^Is that the only reason ? So far as the symptoms are concerned ; there
is one principal reason I have, which is this: a dose of strTdmia, sufficient to destroy
life in one paroxysm, would hardly require an hour and a naif or two hours. — ^Wfaat is
your opiman of Ihe cause of death in this case, and on what is that •opinion grounded?
The principal argument is—

Lord CAMFBELL.'-*-We do not want an argument ; we want your opinion : yon are
asked what is your opinion as to the cause of death ? The cause of death was from
convulsions, -^^eptic convulsions with tetanic symptoms ; that is the nearest approach,
from my reading, but for the post-mortem appearances in Ck»k's case being so differest
from those I have described, and from the supposition that a dose of strychnia sufficient
to destroy life in one paroxysm would, so far as I am aware, have required even an hour
for its absorpti<m or actioQ.

Mr. Kenealeyi — ^Does the interval of repose from the Monday night to the Tuesday at
all operate on your judgment in coming to that oondnsion ? If my opinion that it was
of an epileptic character were correct, it would. — It is your opinion that if that were of

an epileptic character then what follows ? The intennifisioa from the Monday night

would be considered important, as epilepsy sdaures very ofWn recur about the same
hours, as I have seen them. — Assuming that a man was in such an excitable atate of
mind that he was silent for two or ihree minutes after his horse winning a race, that he
exposed himself to cold or damp, that he excited his brain by diinking, and he was
attacked by violent vomiting, and after his death gritty granules were found in the
neighbourhood of his spine, could not, in the present instance, such a death as it was
arise from those causes ? Any one of those causes might aggravate or hurry it. — You
say any one of those causes? Might cause it.

Cross-examine^ by the Attomey-Qeneral.

Where do you practise? At Gamkirk, near Glasgow. — Are you a general prac-
titioner there ? General surgeon to the Gamldrk works. — That is not a public institution ?
No, the iron-works; and parochial medical officer. — ^How many cases of idiopathic tetanus
have you had personal experience of? Two; this one I have recorded, .and another. —
You mentioned a series of different causes which in your judgment would produce
idiopathic tetanus, but that is not from the result of your own observation ? I have only
seen two cases. — ^But what you have been telling us about mental excitement, sensual
excitement, is not within your own observation ? Nor do they seldom occur to any
medical practitioner ; this case might have arisen from those icauses. — ^Have you any
reason to think it did ? I have no reason to do so. — ^Then do not teU us what it might
have done ; now, in the case of Catherine Watson ? I saw her about half-past 10 at
night. — ^How long before she became ill ? She had been ill very nearly an hour before I
saw her. — ^What symptoms had she? Convulsions. — ^Did you understand how long
before that she had felt any inconvenience ? She had gone about her usuid duties np to
the evening. — But a person may go about Ibeir usual duties, and yet feel an incon-
venience ? She felt a slight lassitude previous to that time; I could only press her to
this acknowledgment in my anxiety to get at the i^naqptoms ; she would not own to any-
thing being the matter with her ; it was only by close ^nesaii^ that ahe «ould ^aall ilfc to

KIKTH DAY, Mat 28, 1656. 251

Bke call to 'wind that sbe bad felt any ttiftMSS im anj period? No; ao
. — This was, I diiak y^om my, at oiglit; in the eveaing, wlien the lock-jaw came
OH ? I think in an hour or two» I ooald not be po^tiye ; I could not make any obEcrra-
tiona as to time. — ^Tbe case ooeapied all your attention in itself? Tes. — ^la tbe other
case, of Mr. CopelaBd ? it was a young child. — ^What age ? I thimk between three and
foot months old. — ^Was that the person of the name of Oopeland ? Yes. — ^What was tibe
matter with the child ? I saw tt in good health hiJf an hour before the attack came on ;
I was attending the mother at the time. — ^It had no attack of eonTulsions ? Yes, and
opisthotonos.-— Yon had seen it half an hour before ? As near as I can reelect. — ^How
soon did it die ? I rode away from the house, and they supposed I had not gone a couple
of miles when it died. — ^lit was seized with a fit ? Apparently a spasm, which I consiaer
to be of the tetanifonn character. — You had seen the child half an hour before ? Yes ;
these was noCbinp^ the matter with it then; it was in bed, I belieye, with the mother ; she
was laid up, I think ; the <diild was lying in the bed. — Did you see it ? I did not see its
face; I saw it lying in bed; I did not examine it. — ^IMd you see its face? I do not
recollect ; I saw the child. — Did you see its face ? I did not. — You mean the child was
lyidQg in the bed ? Yes. — ^What do you mean by saying it was asleep ? I judged it to
be aaleep.— Is that the same thing as seeing it asleep ? You must recollect we medical
men can form a judgment on snch a subject better than lawyers or any one else. — ^Whea
were you applied to in this case ? In January. — Who applied to you ? Mr. Smith. —
How did he nnid you out ? I can hardly say how he found me out ; I communicated
this case to him of Catherine Watson, as resembling the symptoms of what I heard of
Mr. Cook's death, as being nearly the same. — When did you furnish your notes ? Just
now; I think the night beiore last. — ^When did you come up ? I have been here about
a week; from the beginning of the trial. — ^Attending and assisting here ? Attending in
court daily. — ^And at the consultations? Of course I have been at the consultations. —
You wrote to Mr. Smith, sending this case ? I suppose Mr. Smith may produce the
original notes.-^ do not suggest anything about them ; with regard to the case of the
amrnals that you expeiimented on with strychnia, when did you begin with them ? I
began this series of eKjperiments for this case in January. — B&d you ever made any
befixre f Yes; i think eight or ten years ago ; it was at the time I discovered that Ine
strychnia oould be deteetMl in the body by a physiological test in the blood. — ^What was^
the dosewiHi which you killed the animals on which you experimented? I think
fh>m a grain and thfee^quarters to two grains. — ^What were the animals ? Do^, cats,
rabbits, said fowls; these experiments will rdate to dogs. — What dose did you administer?
Three-quarters of a grain to two gniinsa — Just see in how many instances you gave three-
qnstfters of a grain ? A grain is ihe smallest. — ^Tell me in how many of your experi-
ments you used a gcain, in how many two ? Four with a gnun, five with a grain and a
hal^ and one, I think, witiii a grain and a quarter, and two with two grains. — Did you
try any as iow as half a gndn ? I gave some half a grain. — ^I am speaking of the dogs ? .

Lord Campbbix. — He s^ys he did not in that series.

The Attorney-General. — I am speaking of that series of experiments | one grain is the
minimum ? Yes, and two ,the maximum. — ^You never tried them with half a grain ?
Yes, I did ; I did not mention it before. — ^What was that ? I did it for the purpose of
ascertaining the least dose that would kill. — ^Did you try it to see whether you could
detect it afterwards by your chemical process ? How could I try that before I killed the
dog? — Do you mean, on your oath, to tell me you do not imderstand my question?
Bepeat it again. — ^Have you not understood it ? Perhaps I slipped it. — ^Upon your oath
did you slip it ? Upon my oath I may have slipped it. — Do you mean, standing there
as a witness in this Court, you do not know the question I put to you ? I have perhaps
forgotten the question.

Lord Campbell.-— Cannot you tell the question? Was the question, did I detect a
grain of strychnia ?

The Attorney-General,— "Do you believe that to be the question I put to you ; on your
solemn oath do you believe it ? On my solemn oath I imderstand you to ask if I had
detected half a grain in a dog.— I asked you whether in that case you had afterwards
tried to find the strychnia by vour chemical process ? Decidedly ; I gave five or six dogs
poison with a quarter or half a grain to discover the smallest dose that would kill. — ^I
want to know wheliier they are in those notes ? They are enumerated among these. —
Show me one amongst those wheie you have ^ven hali a grain ? I did not make a note
of it, because it did not kill.— In tliat series you bave not one with less than a grain?
Of course not, for the finishing, the killing ; those are the doses with which I kill the
animaL — ^I am speaking of those ? These do not apply to this series of experiments. —
I mmt you to show me ti note of your having killed a dog with half a gram ? I have!

a52, TRIAL OF ^1^^Afif,¥umfi.

killed upwards of forty ^lum^lfi, and t|^er^, w.^f^ A ^(>^^r %r>f » lMi yBrt ft l>i» yrfhg tBy»ffc«fag
on the post-mortem.— Have you ever destroy|^4,8id9|j^wjit^,i*aJC*(lr5tt-of. irtiyidiidli
No, I have not — Have you ever tried it.? ' I hiv^ trie^ |t|ir%i?d. it^dimott »a*w*r.fr— New*'
let u» come to your symptoms j yQ,u,;5a|y ,yQuJiavfi ab^a>4 /yiwidtfjlfti Wnfin^rthfigMjiuwiH
gested ? At the stoppage of th^ clrcu!Utu)n }fk (the 4»yfi)^i]|^4^|j|iie)cii:f|ilMMi^ia>*iBi|>ed^V
the spasms impede the circuJiatioh. — Is It pot^^f M>ftfjft» ,yf , ^^e t j pupka vmy musalflvotlnt
canse that? It is the Spasms oJt .atl. t^'e. muactqs toK4^«|i?fr77Y;$MHilQM'lMtinKaii*'tt>
pepi-esent that the spasms of Jhe fpet yoijJd.,4q itf. .it^Wu^ iluH^itOK-dinitJ-^r
Is not the immediate cause of tjie fi4ne§^ of ,tVf},j^je^; afteijj^^a^,AthiAiitiifoWBpii3Bfoi?y /.
muscles are arrested in their ac^ion^ and, jlh^l«i^£9r^a^()i^.iP^y(^{H^id«^
diate cause of the convulsive spasms. thfuS^' tb^ ,Gi9Q4,put^,^f, t|^ ^mkUiiisenela ^kOip^Mhe
larger vessels of the cavity^ rad ^l jthe 'iw;ge,,y^^M .i^t^i^j-ilmd ^fa«)7findri^sie«.
lungs entirely coHapsed.— ^miet^^^i jyoi^ &ajd ^JP^: fopg<|pt^?t .^wr^JyirrSftw* IdLD^you;
account for It when tli^ 'lun^s are 'con^e^ed,ms ib,nQt,,iU/po^i^i^ 0C;i&ot4iftal Ui&^ci^i
fipiratory muscles prevent the pla^y 9^ tW lu^gjsr ,. j;>ej|«?idedly,'froi|i fteiftgfei<pos«dLt*»iiairw •
you not forund in soni'e ' eds'^^ itlis^t' .the J^rsun ]ra^ j;ii>^ Gpng^t<»d ? Jtfjb^^ftbank'iA lerDeiJhr
case there were >adre bf'less cpngesUoi^,— U9 yo,u,,An4i<iat 4^,^ :greirtcr imiptvpei-^
tion to the'lepcth'bf the'j)arOxysm(,,,l>9, JL iSiid H ^o. )^ ^^iitesi wheriB .t^anhnal-.
was young iind in afullstatfe bf^neJ^ltli.— There would l>6.tha^ dilfcr^iiMivath weg^Ato'thev
state of heafltht thWe^^^uldj b^e por? ^ J^ cpjogestiipn ? It depends op fherifalaesfidf
blood. — Ifeve you eyeir sejen any^oase pf traufloiatic tetanus?' .yes^HowrflKUBy ^'vH
think two in 'fflj '• dwii iyra^tice • ' bui X li$v9 seen 9. few othws in h^^pitM.-rrlHbw loa%)'faavit> j
they lasted f , TU6 one'liisl!ed ^][K)ut Jflye or, six hours ; I cannot r^meiiibilP'sthfe ^articula^ '
atta(ik ; th* bthef i'6'CoVtd^.'^T3'<i)W tpng was jit, about r The paroxysm Jiast^dsix ^pnseTeii '
hottrs. — Arifl' he' effftettl^Tly redovered, did he ? Ii^o ; it is a long tiiDejagOi»i and i htcnoatoi
a tiofe of tiiQ'tfa^^'j' Jt' <j6uTd not, be precise about it,-rJHftve you.. ever. ^seema case/^of
atrjrch^rla -in thfe hlinliian snbjebt ? ' P{o, 1 have not — I understand you to sayfthat an ydup
ojimion ifi^S #ti$ a'ea^'of epilepsy, with tetanic complications? AAifar as ItcsiLJiKlge/
frotn' h^tiil^ the^'^^eiice in Co'|irt; I think it was a case of epileptic Q!Bttvidfloiifirwitfa> '
tetanic* coitfplid^otts.-7-What does epilepsy proceed from? Nobody 'can aaMirertyott tint'
question*.— Yoft K?iV^ no "theory upon the subject? I have not exutetiy an'i^fid at-sofy
distinct th^dry*, nbt' quite as distinct a£ strychnia or tetanus.-r-Ba^ve you^'Seen deoA firtnJ
epilep^?'- l^es*, X'havejseen one case of death from e^ilepsy»T— W^ thie^wtieBl^iCokiscioBS'
when h6'dled? No* — Did you ever know a case of epilepsy wto^e ttbe pfktient'wte cob«-
seioui^? ' I'hatte Seen only one death. — Does your reading ifura^sh yOQ. with<ani^)iBsta(iioe»y
I lean ref^^rVbii to i^ere you will find it in Dr. Goode's work, wfafre. you find iastanota
of conticiotisness duHng epil^tic attacks.^I am speaking of 4i^ time of dfl$lih/? -Lftaiaiot
recollect. — Can ybu find me any case in which coDse^oufiness has |H!f^«dcd . dfislh.?- • >I
ol^nOt^WcoHect^— 'fx)n have studied on pu^rpose ft>r the^^ cnses ? .No 4, J -aiUiipnth^/i'veU
up' in mtlst brancSies.— ^Being so universally proficient in, the^sf^i^nc^voif tjf^ur .ipnonssioii;!
do yo\f knoit" of any single recorded case of consciousness at the<;timo. of dtwth 2 I *do

'W&e

a^rfefe'Witfe tWat?' 7 '^a^e'Tieard it, and I hare giv^u you my opinion candidly
'O^iily.^i^i^hat'Hf'ftr the disease? I have given yqu my opiniofl^ that it leas, as fax.
«carfleitti,'tt''d^atti''fV^" epileptic convuJsioiji§ witl} tetanic o^plicaliotis.

' Xrord CAMt»BEiL.— Is that disease )^QO,i^ni.ai^o9gi.anedioal m«n ? Yes; you will find

.i^<p/J^^9i.;^^6i??^rfi^.-^Tjj»atiathe gentleiMiii of li^hotn'we have heai^ once or twice?
Ypuy^ll^^ijdijj^njj^y^ryfWQirk.wi jfistovidwdnsi^ ttiadef any application to Dr.

#-,-_f__ 1 ^^jg case? I have his workiy^iHikii I >hav<^ sttidM occasionally.— And you
' ' " '^ .beJiirre thatideaih'to have b6en ti death

ijtoirTOfer t^anjr eaiise whiiteVer as

^hfU ideaths often take )^lacei in

' * " I may 'Ea!y^ — .-•-That is

me what was the cause of

< ,. * , *inr -^tiAi ^ T ,i*i,Mrr . all forms of convulsions

arisfe fliom 4 d'ecdfipositioh of me 1)1^^ aijq. .^f. f person has probably an incipient
tendenc^j^ to disease' iJrthe''bi^^,diiatJt^al?ray^i^ay })e,aifecte<i,.and that. the dccotupoffltion
of the blood tni^ cafe^e't6;iielj'u^,tl^^^

Lord Campde:^,— Just., repWt, what. y38^ Wreaaid? f believe that all convntive
diseases, including the epileptic. fonp and tJii^iwaouaJ»tanic coinplicatiotas (that would

XINTH DAT, Mat 33» 185^. 253

indode aU), aiiie from a dBBompontioa of the blood, ud tliat tlM deeomposed blood acts
on the nerves. — Do I nnderstind yoa that mental excitonent had anything to do with
this ? I do not say it had ; it mi^it have had. — The qnestkm was put to yon as to your
opinion ? I said it mi^t have caased it ; it was within the range of pntebility that it
might have caused it.— Ciased what? Caased the eooTnluTe aUacks.— What mental
excitement? Any mental excitement— I am nieaking of this particnlar excitemoit to
Thich yoa refer these symptoms? It is stated he was subject to exmtement. — ^Do yoa
find any excitement in this case? I find at Shrewsbury he was excited* and wherever
Tou have excitement yon haye a constant d^ression. — Do you find he was depressed ?
When you find a man in bed sick, he most be depressed. — ^I am «rpfy^i"g of the d^ression
consequent on these symptoms; wlMme do you find any symptom of illness until he
begms to vomit ? If I have mudh excitement, if I am up all night it npsets me the next
day, and I generally vomit the fiiod I take. — You do if you are excited ? I Tomit the food
I take if I have had anv excitement. — ^This is not a question of excitement ?

any excitement. — ^This is not a question of excitement ? He
overjoyed at winning his race. — ^And you think he vomited in consequence? He might.
—I am not asking about what he nught do? If he had the same predisposition that
I have, the same dyspeptic rf mptoms. — ^Do you mean to swear, am I to understand
you to say, that you think the excitement of the three minutes on the course on
the Tuesday account^ for the vomiting? I do not mean to say anything of the kind.
—Do you find any excitement or depression from that time till the time he died?
There is nothing reported that I can recollect just now. — On the contrary, do yon
not recollect tmu me man when he was not vomiting, on that very night, wis
jokmg and laughing in a jocular manner ; was that sufficient to make him vomit ?
That may well be, where a man is subject to bilious fits. — ^We are talking of ex-
citement ; we are talking now of epilepsy with tetanic complications ; I want to
know on what you can put your hand in the whole history ox the man's symptoms
in the way of excitement or depression which will account for the remarkable
symptoms that occurred? I have told you that almost any one of them is sufficient. —
Give me any one of them ; where is there any one to which you can ascribe the
death in this case ? When you find in many cases we can discover no traces at all ■ -.
—Answer my question ; you give a series of causes which you say would cause death ?
Might have occasioned' death. — ^Where is there one of these causes existing in this
ease? These causes were stated to have been present. — Which? There was one;
those white spots that were seen in the stomach. — I am talking of what you have
already said might have caused death ? These might have caused death by an in-
flammatory conmtion of the stomach. — ^The stomach was not inflamed? We heard
about these white spots. — ^But there was no inflammation of the stomach, was there ?
I have given you my opinion. — If there had been any, would not the gentlemen who
examined it have seen it? If Uiose white spots were present, you would have had
inflammation. — They say there was none? I do not believe them. — Sensual excite-
ment is a cause of epilepsy, with tetanic complications ; is that what you say ? Yes,
It might. — Do you find in this case, is there a tittle of evidence of this man having
uader^one any such excitement? I think so. — What? You have heard about the
syphihtic spots ; there was no doubt about it. — Do you mean to say that you attribute
this to some excitement that has taken place at some anterior period, long before?
I am not called upon to say that ; I take my opinion from what was seen, — Supposing
the man had undergone any excitement of the description you mention a week before ;

ao you mean that that is sufficient to account for these symptoms? We know^ . —

Is it, oris it not? Yes ; we have instances on record where convulsions have supervened
m the very act you allude to.~Have you any instance of its setting in a fortnight
afterwards ; that is the question ? It is quite within the range of possibility. — Would
epilepsy, with tetanic complications, set in from that cause; do you mean to stand
there, as a serious man of science, and tell me that ?

Lord Campbell. — ^What is the question ( that within a fortnight after sexual in-
tercourse, that might bring on convulsions ? Yes ; the results of sensual excitement.

The Attorney-General. — ^What are the results ? You have seen the results; I have de-
scribed them. — What are they ? Chancre is one of them, apd syphilitic sore-throat. —
Do yon naean that was the cause of his death ? I do not.— Did you ever know of such a
^ing ; did you ever hear or know of such a thing as a chancre producini^ epilepsy ?

When I have told you that very slight causes . — I will have an answer ; did you ever

hear of any other form of syphilis producing epilepsy ? Not epileps}% but tetanus ; you
are forgetting the tetanic complications. — If 1 understand it rightly, it stands thus:
that the sensual excitement produces the epilepsy, and the chancre reproduces the
tetanic complications ? You are quite mistaken j I say the result of a sensual ex-
citement.

254 . TRIAL OF WIIUAll RALMER.

Mr. Baaok AuNAMV.^liiuMttty «h» [Umgkcisr] 4t li^^ftl3»*iflaMent^wh^«. nfttti is
being tried for l^e. «.'•'>.

The Attomeif-Gfmerah-^lH there ttnythiiig e!se t© wlilcfe yon can aicrfte this extra-
ordinary d«idi,'v]iich <evenkl medicfll men have said eould hot'be aifcribed to aiiy kticm
foim of disease ? 1 hare only givett my opinion ; I have fiaid k nright hare been that. —
You Tohiirtedred, I jiNMiine, in lHAi eftSe,'1o come aiid g^e' errdtoce ? ' No, I did not ;
nor did I wtaaet to eome; hut I Was a«4ced t6 eome. — Yoa 'have jnstnow said that
your xeason for diinlLiBg snd Peferting it to' epilepsy was, that amongst other things
an hovr or an hour and a half intervened' between the t(^ng of the ]^i9r>n and the
appeanokce of the firtt aymptoms ; do yoti mean tSiat in yonr reading you have not met
with cases qoite as h>ng when the death has arisen 'from 'Strychnia ? i cannot recollect
where death has ibUowed.^---IHd ydn hear the case tead t\^i othei' day from * The Lancet,'
by Dr. Taylor, in wfaioh death took plac'e mone than aii hour after the administration,
when the sympitoms appeared? That is an 'hour; T said, or 'ztx honr'iind a half.—
Did you hear the case, stated 'm the evidence, of the girl at 'Glasgow? Yes. — How long
waa. she. before she^was dead? Twenty minutes, if 1 recollect riglitly, the first symp-
toms, and only three quarters of an hour dead, I believe. — ^Your reading has not
famiaked yon with any instant in which the symptoms have come on so late? I
cannot recollect -any. — ^Would the fatct of morphia having been given for an hour or two
previously in any way t)o«Ksh yo«r opinion with regard to the qne^ion of poison ? No, I
have aeen opium bring on convulsions very nearly the same. — Opium in what quantify ?
I think a' grain aiid<a half.— Would that have any effect? t thmk so, judging from my
experience. — ^Will opium brijig on convulsions ? Ves, but a different form of convulsions
from epilepsy .-^Because opitrm brings on convulsions, you assume in this case that
morphia accented the disease? Drawing the inference, I should say it might. —
Suppoae for a mometit there was ^lot a case of epilepsy, but a case in which strychnia
was administered ; asmne that hypothesis, what should you say would be the action of
mC|rphia if it bad been<taken-; how would it attack the disease ? In some cases it stimulates ;
it is exceedingly apt to ctfuse congestion of the brain. — In which disease does it cause
excitement ? It d«!pend8 on the idiosyncracy ; it depends • on the habit of a body, if
I might use a comm<Mi tenn. — Is it not plain it was given here to allay excitement and
not produce it? But not Very often has the supposed effect. — ^You think here it had?
• I say- it may have done and it may not. — Havmg taken it on the Saturday and Sunday
night, and having been free from nervous excitement on the Sunday and Monday,
what should you assume? I cannot tell ; it depends on the idiosyncracy. — Judging from
the reanlt? If it were opium ; yet it is only presumed to be opium ; it appears to have
soothed Junu-^Did he have opium on Saturday or Sunday? Yes, in pills. — And why,
when rthe mmn was tranquH on the Sonday and Monday, did you after that venture to
my that tluaK f>i)ls irriteted him? I do not mean to say they did. — He having had
marfbiA mrea him on the two previous days, Saturday and Sunday, for the purpose of
.quieting his «xciteaient, would the tendmey of them be to tranquillize the nervous ex-
«iteiBent^ and to rendar it less easily excitable ? You must not assume that, unless you
teli me the .state of the brain«-— Assuming tite account to be right, that there was not
.congestiiHi ? The almte-of tiie brain at the tioMi that the opium was taken, I want to know.
•^There was not eongeation when the death took plaee ? But in Mr. Bamford's deposi-
tions he says there was. — Do yom prefer tifie depositions of Mr. Bamford to the evidence
of Dr. Harland and Dr. Monkton ? In judging of such a oase I took all the symptoms,
and took that among the rest. — ^They say there was none ? But Mr. Bamford says there
waa.-»-You think Mr. Bamford's deposition is to be taken before their evidence ? A man
of ^manifest experience ourfit to have known much better than younger men what he
saw. — Look at his age ? He must have made a great many post-mortem examinations.
— He said it was apoplexy ; do you think it was apoplexy ? No, I do not ; I do not
think it was apoplexy, as the word is commonly used. — ^Is there any difference in the
meaning of apoplexy ? Are yoh aware *w)jat apoplexijf is ?— That is of very Kttle im-
portance ; I want to lmt)W whether you think this was apoplexy? The principal sym-
ptom of apoplexy is a congested state of the hrain.'-^I asked yon whether you think this
was a case of apoplexy? It was »ot.^— Then what do yon think of Mr. Bamford now;
do yon still set hhn T^vagainst the* two gentlemen- who nude the iiost^siortem ex-
amination ? I adhere to what the one sanr ; the othwr is 'a »ere matter of opinion.

He-examined by Mr. Serjeant Shee,

' My friend asked you about this child*. I suppose you have seen a gseat many children

in their cradles ? Yes. — ^And you have seen them with their bodies and their arms in

certain positions that may give you a pretty good idea whether they are asleep or not ?

Yes. — ^From what you saw, ana your experience in such matters, I dare say you now

XINXfl DAY« JkUT 48, 1856. 265

think tiuii ir«$ a very fair opinion to tern vate Itaje^KM^winwtoiioag ? Y«a^W« will
go on : ^ou have expres&ed an opiaioji, uot that this was a case «f actual eqpilqi^, bat of
coavuUion of an epileptic fonu cooihixieid ndth tetanio compUcatians ; and you stated
that though you had seeu no such case, your reading iuforxned you that there had beea,
and you mentioned Br. Mason Goode ? Yes, — Is he a well-known author on the subject
of convulsions f He ii^^-^Asid th^ir various forms and resemblance, and «o <on ? Yes. —
Have you, fi-om youi; reading of that aad ofber worlds, a^certaijj^ that there is a class

you kjuuov, Jtrom ^ose mui a^<^ wea^S, that with .ppisthotonos the patieat frequently

^ 9;Qn$ustent with your JuiowJe4ge 91 the disease that li constantly
at night, and mbed? X^ry often.7^Does .it fiometioi^ happen that its existence is
Ivuown to a yo^ng man's qi* woman's Jfaml^^ without, being known to himself or herself?
Yes, that comes withjn the range pf iuv.own.e,xptji'ience.— Xio the convulsions which the
uutliors of whom, you have spoken* and parsonsi ot medi^ science geneA'ally^ do not class
piroperly, as epilepsy, but as couvulsions of an ^tpUentic chai^cter* are they spmetimeB
attended with premonitory syonptoms ? SQmetime&.-^And is the patient sometimes thrown
into tetanic and tetaniform convulsions ? Sometime&' — Does it sometimes happen that,
pending the struggle of the convulsions, in this way actual epilepsy comes on, and the
patient dies 2 Y^, it may, from spasm. — Can you tell me whether it be a know4i cha-
lacter of epilepsy » and of convulsions of an .ejpiltiptio character, that a patient may have
suffered in the^night and be weU the next morning, and as well the next day as if he
had had no fit at all ? It veiy often happens, more especially where adults are seized for
the jBrst time. — ^When an adult is seized for the first time, is it consistent with your
experiaaoe that several fits follow each other during a short poriod.? Very^o^en. —
My learned fdend has aslsed you where you find evidence of depression; did you hefo*
the deposition .of Mr. Bamford i^ad ? I did. — If it WQre»tcue that his mind appeared dis-
tressed and irritable the afternoon before he died, would you infer &om that^ioonfiidenirg
the excitement and elation under which he iiad Ibnaerly labom'Ofl, that he. was under* a
state of depression or not ? Yes. — You luwe been asked wliether excitameuty whiqh ^bir
good reasons we have chosen to call sensual excitement, lesiding often to disagseeahle
and unpleaaaut results, wheth^ you could by any possibility account for it : have you
any reason to know that theve had been no excitement of the sameluad lin the jaoan. time?

Lord CAitHSBi:*L4*-*Yott *caBaot put that question.

Mr. f^erjetmt Shee. — You have been asked whether you could point to ««ry part of the
evidence which you have heard tepding to show that he liad been under nervous excite-
ment on the Sunday or the Monday ; do you recollect what was proved to have been
said of what happened in the middle of the Sunday night? Yes. — ^What would you
infer ii-om tfiat, supposing it were true that he represented himself to be mad fbr ten
minutes, and it was occasioned by a quanel in the streets ? That he had been seized
with some sudden cramp or i^sm.— apposing there were no stioh cramp, and that 'he
meant to tell thh truth, wotild you refer 'what he said to any nervous and mental excite-
ment? "Yes, decidedly.

Lord Campbell. — If fhere were no cramp or spasms? There? must be some dis-
turbance of the bram.

Mr. Scijcatit Shee* — You have been asked as to the spots in the stomach, which you
mentioned when my friend was examining vou j and, 1 think, you stated you difiered
from some gentlemen of your profession ? Yes.— You stated, you di4 not believe them ;
but did you mean that you differed. in opinion Vitl^ them ? Yes. . ,

The Atioaun^Gei^rai* — 1^^ said he did not believe them? I did jgiot.; .XixLid not
believe that infiammation could be ab^entrand t^ese^potfitpresent*

Mr. 8eii9amiMieei*--lSBNh ywft known in yoiirowBiesEpenence«ny serioiis j^onseqnenoaof
a convulsive ohasraoter «maiBg, ear reaaonahlT imputed, to spota <ol <ihat <desoription? I
haT&.->-Oao-70u m^^tioa theAcase;..how long ago did it oocfur^ : Aibout twenty years
ago ; it ^ras published.-^ laean the- ease you saw ? Tlw eaflo I hawe«teen would be about
eighteen months ago ; it was a case of death, and I was examining the body. — In that ,
case did yen find that was the only -cause of death? !No,«t was^a case of fever, I
thought ; I did not know what they wese, and consulted all the atitlvoM w)io had 'treated
on the mucous stBoetnre of the stomachy and could find no aoeoiant of it but in one»
which I havehere.-^W'hat is that.? itis an eseay by Dr. SpPMhoid.

R 2

256 TfilAI. OF WVLLIAM PAUfBR.

The Attomey'GeneraL^^WhBW Is he- to be fo«i4 ? He is 4eetBtaed^ ' ....>.,../
lifr. Serjeant 8he6. — ^Was he a medical man practisiflg ih this country or'aimtlief?
Tes, he praetised in Edinhargh.*^What is the case he i^aks of? (.The tumkifMi
the case,) •

Dr. JOHN NATHAN BA^INBRIPGE .svorn-^Examined by Mrl Groi^e,

Yon are a doctor of mectieine and mediciil officer tothe 9k« Martin's VDrkhoose? Tec,
lam. — Have yon nmch-cxpesience ■ofcannilslvediMideffei?. IluBve^qryreoDBiderable.
—Do convulsive disarders admit of gmt* variety* of. JsytnptMmrf Very great; very indeed.
— At^ there canses of them vasynn^ from what ejre-diBed^^aoniO diseases'to rigid opis-
thotonos ? Yes, hysterical oonvnfcions are vtary ^ficqnently aeoMnpanied 'with opisthotooes;
convulsions of the muselcs of the bach, abd ii the limbs.-'-^JDb the different caees vaiy as
to the frequency of the recarrences^ knd as to Che nmsoleiT attaeked ? Yes; they :vary very
much. — Is periodicity common ? It is very common ; I osn aenliQix a. verjr remar kaMe
instance of that— You mtim >y peopodiwfy, occurring z,% the same time? The same
hour, the same day, and at the interval of a year, and it occurred in my papii; he ^rW
attacked on the Christmas night ; he wi^ called up, and fell on the floor ; on the Christmas
night twelvemonths he had the same kind of attack exactly, and at the same hoar; 1
have known this very common sit shorter periods, snch as 12 or 24 honi^^ thes^ disdrden
mn so imperceptibly one into the Hither,' that it is almost impossible for the iitwt eirpe-
rienced medical man to tfe^de where one kind of convulsion terminates and the other
begins. — You said hysteria was frequently accompanied by opisthotonos ; do TOu apply
that answer to females as well its males? Yes, to both. — Are epileptic attacks accom-
panied with tetanic bompUcatious, or tetanic spasms ? Frequently, and hysterical also.—
X ou have not beard the witnesses in this case ? No, I have not, except to-day.

Grass*«xamined by the Attomey^QeneraL

Do hysterical conrvtdsions end in death when attended by these tetatHc symptoms;
does it ever end in death without? Very rarely indeed. — ^Have you ever kttowh hcaser
Yes, I have known one case, that was within the last three months ; it was a male in St.
Martin's workhouse.— ^How long had the man been ill? He had been ill but a very short
time« but he had had previous attacks on several occasions. — He bad been sub^^ct to thess
ayttaoks for several years, had he not ? Yes. — Of the same complaint ? Of the same
[complaint; he was only ill a few months on the last occasion before he died^ he was
taken with a kind of convulsion, I am told, but before I got to him he was d€ad--^^hst
were the appearances after death ? I did not examine the body .-r— Did you hear what the
symptoms had been? I was told by those, who saw him that Ke was attacked with certain
cpnvttlsions and fell on the ground; they lifted him up on th^ bed, and in five nuDutes
he was dead.— Was there anything ot opisthotonos? Not that I ain aware of on

"spasmo/" ' ' '
jxtent.-

jdi^d?. 1 believe not. — Can you undertake tp say that that was not a death by apopk^y'

No, I'canno^t undertake to say that ; the symptpips w^re ^mewhat of the same character

but more of the character of epilepsy. — Are hysteirla and epilepsy the same thing ? It wouw

be very difficult for any man to dufiue Che dififerenoe in semeinstances. — In fact, had ^^^!

im^^fcieen mH^t *? these fits £»r a tong serwP^jQify«ar»«ftnd ftt \f^ he died in one <>^*^"^

.,l&s,i»e.)iad.-^Wbat aged man was he^ Abflut 35- ; he w^ %hi brother of the celeD»wj^

0x0mu^ hkvt^, Gale.-r-In attacks of this j^ture-is tWeM.the ^> a loss of ^^^^

nm^ ?-s-N^|i gepieralfy ; som^imes : I hftye. seen iscyofal oasetin whieh there ba* ***|^|

, and riiiiothers. they csm almost «mder8it«»d imfilhing .yflft.^ay U>', them, not P®"^*/ ^j,]

h*^fijhnt.yon^nay.TWise^efll>--nM[i«hft a man. be iQOMoidus so that the power ^'^ J^

. s^onsiv^ssi isf pot iin4 a^y wayrafictcked? ,:Jn ^otne. instancis, q^ite^r-Have you ^^F^a^

t^n} ins)#Aee!A«( ifrhJohfa'Jftft»fWMyable'itorSpfi«k..aftp? t^^pMOxysmliadiset in ? ^*^ ^

ipaiPiyiPn was pver.Tr.^ jai»f#pf»k«^ /Of wheift *e ipasQ^ym. tes ;«et in s »fe they »w* ^

speak.?' r'I5h«y.iwiil,i»ye«wtt»idfflreoiftUeo^ ^^^^r^

a^iy.of t]ik9To^AWkifAbi&^^t^W^ipPs*Akm ^hfu|»ed.?.^iNo<«!tn ihe ftctuai viaJen<«. ^ ^
^ps«03^ySW.-nIs ^iIgI»y,4rtt»ide4.Vitl< i^l^pten^i^ .(•^ometime8.--<nU it ^^P**, we
bivd?/ Yes»rrrVhm»>th^<K)«fji(^iofl8 AT© S(?irm«iei*thiU;-opisth«ton/w is pradtt«<'% j^
yoaevec toownithen^fonsoipttS'?! .YjeR, pfl?tijj qoowiousk-^ mean quite oonscjoofi^
they were asked subsequently' rthiey.iWOfiJdrecpUeet.trbilt had oocnrred^— That- is^^^
they have r«oove^»? t. Yes4-T-iiavi9'ye«^ «een:CAse8<of traumatic tetanw ? I hs^^- .^ -^
you aware that the patient, jiKtaim' hjis iiepnfieievsfiess ? • ^Almost alva|ys.-r^^y^ ' ^^
not so ? Always, as fiMs-aa rj, h«?e <^0f ed.-r-you say. .thitt.thqre are the same ^J^ ^^
as in tetanus, real tetanus ? No ; not to the same extent. — ^Then there is the y9V^

expressing any desiiirwiii<Ai'«iay be pvM^t'to the ibiod'of the stiSerer ? Not during
-tlw ?pa3rfixy6m;~^Ha'V9 yjou knova ejpikpsy end in death ? Freqaently. — ^You tell me you
hi^ye known pf hystenaivit^ tetanic coidplicationtf' end in death? In many cases, — If
epilepsy end in death, still you say you do not see the distinction : you are making one
in your own mind ? It is a very difficult tf^jig to define the exact line. — Because you
tell me yoii haVe knoVli t)f ifcr^sterii e^difa'g ?fl 'death, I wfsh you to inform me what in
ydtlr opmiodiS'the'daiatinMiciffbeitw^eiitfilun? 'Tbelssseon^eiomSDeBS is more especially
iDftod in. •epilepsy^ aiid^by^^e^siidiSen'fallrog down;**4^is it' not aniyersally present in
epikvpej9' NQy3i0t;uDSY&i«diys''2'^lKTe^,iie0n'them (mnuny occBnons. — ^Did you erer
know^a oase^of'^eoAlof repil^sV'ivber«t«lini«an8Db8VTiiw 'Uot destroyed* before death?
No^ i do not &tiorvr Mu&'MHoir iiounyi rcas^s / vf/^ epilepsy -kaTe yoa seen ? Many scores.—
How many oi such t cas^ hkf^e yda knoiw** ? * ' i eimibt > kmAL to ' my reeolleetion exactly ;
I daoetisay tlen^o]^ a^ do i e « ji " WhaBe"it'<kas ended: a^- death? - Yes>-^l8 «oiisoiousne6s
tfetaiauedi?> Nottotheieminstioh ofiti&;t<' ^ ^( il i •• .

" 'Mr:>^^€kMf J8A<?0.>^I tlihik'itl^'dix st^^itt|tti6t^ '^Ht Mr.'€b)6k irais cdnseions between
-the Jafet ihrtefc -and his dtttth:- ' -"■■ ''•' ' •• '■ ''•""' ■•.'••-.■ .•■ ■

Ife-exfwmedby.Mi-. <?rQt)^, , , . .
. . , Yqu are aske4> aff to the consciofasn^efis in hystwii^al paj^^t«, after the paraxyim is
av^c, if ..they, were oosiscioYis of hearing? .Yes { .I.hs^yi^ irequoptly a«k(sd • them^— And
yov, have found tjtiat they were? \Ye8.-*-l4< falling. a^sl^ep. a i^uali^ing after ^ileptic
Sfas,? . Alnwfit inTariaWy. , ♦ , . •-,.

' 'Mf. EDWABD AUSTIN STEADY swwn.^B^attiued by Mr. ^rdry.

Are you a member of the Royal College of Sureeons? " T am.— You are 'in practice as
a surgeon at Chatham? I am. — In the month or June, 1854, did'yoti attend a person
of the name of Taylor? Yes ; for trismus and pleurosthotonos.

, Lord,CAMPB£ix. — What do you call the disea^? Tho«e vere the ^laptams that
^leveloped tbemselyes.

The Attomep-GeneraL — Is pleurosthotonos a disease ? Yes $ > and trismus.

Mr. Oroy. — In this case, instead of opisthotonos, it was pleurosthotottos? Yes.^^That
ts the head depending not backwards, but on one side? Yes.^-^In wba4^ stage of the
disease did you first see the patient? She was bent <m one sid^.— IHd conyulsiolM
come on in paroxysms? Yes. — At about what intervals? The first attack continued
for a fortnight.

Loi'd Campbell. — Had she trismus all the time ? Yes.

Mr. Gray, — ^Were there any , remissioils of the pleurosthotonos ? Yes ; for twelve
months there were. — Did she appear to get better then ? To a certain e^^tent : she
walked about, but oi)^ knee was contracted — the tendons were contracted.-— She was
seized about twelve months after? On the 3rd of March, 1855. — ^How loug'did she
continue with the sieizure upon her? About a week. — ^When you first attended ihc cas^,
did you endeavour to ascertain the cause which had brought about this disease ? It' ws,s
detailed me as excitement ; a passion, I believe, brought it on ; I believ^* sY^' h^
had some quarrel with her hiishand. — Pid you discover any other cause ?' ' .N"©. ] , , .

. Cross-examined. by Mr. Ja}?i«(< j <1

When do yea say-Uki^ iraS'ftrBtbtoaicht to yeur attention? la Jattuary, 1654^ I
bel4eve.-^And how long before that had «he cause of it arisen? That is the first time
I saw her; it was ab^mt three or fottriii'tiife lA^ming. — ^Did you ascertain how leng
before she had had this qntav^? Nd ; I did not ask'how long } I suppose I wis called Ini-
mediately; anothcfr medicad mancwas' <iailed,''iHeid we botii arrived together .^J-^Dld^ybU
learn during the quartel she had hfld a'blow?> Ym,^ tlne left side/^-A vidittt him?
I cannot say.--Was it desefrifocd as 'tk^ violent' blow ? Hkmrt'-^aA^tao description i of the
violenoe ; they told Me^ie'hadihsiA a blew'j^^^ii he^'onherisidis by hlsif hasbattdr-^Did
you observe the trismus, the settinglh <rif the lobk-Jtf#' an thaitilme? ' Yefi.'*-HoW l<mg
was she under your car^ hi 1804?' She #ais4fld^r'tiiy ivuhiedlate car^tfbr i^ 'M)rtnight.4-
i think you said duriag thid 'VhdU ^ the fioje «be¥C Wcre-^m^tbttis-of rigidity
aboutthe lower jaw? YeSz-'^nsen'she'^dt be«fer? ' Y^.*^^^hfeildld' you ^eehtt* again:?
I was called to her in March^ 16&fi4^--How fong was she uMdeyyouk' cai^ then^ ' Abotit a
week.— Daring the week did the locking af'th« jaw^'coatifltt^?-' Yes.^^^he* Whole week?
Yes.— Then she got better ? Shtt has li^t^ go^'th»rO«ghl^ Welh'-^he has not got lock-
jaw ? No ; she has tetanic exte&sl«n8"of 'the Km^.in any case of ext&tement-^Twiteh-
ings ? Yes, twitchings.-^-The disease is in aotkm in her system? Atthepi^esent time.-r-
Thatis your opinion? That is my opinion.-~'Wheii did yon see her last? I saw her
yeateiiday.

258 TRIAX OF WnLLIAH PAHfifia

Dr. GEORGE BOBINSOj!^ sworn.— Examined by Mr'. Kcnealey.

Axe yon a LiceBtiait^ of tJiie Boyal CoU^e, of Physiciaaft and Fellow of the BoyU
Medical and Chinucgical Society of London t I auwr— Are yoa Physk»an to the New-
castle-on-Tyne DUpensaiy and Fever Hospilal ? I am. — ^Have yon deroted considerable
attention to patholopy ? I have^ — Havc^ yon pohlished: treatiM* onit ? I ha?e pnUished
eiflays.-— How long have yon practiaed aa a phy«icJaA? I have foe ten ye^is^;— H^ive jton
heard the medical evidence given in thie ca^,? . I hi^Te heai>d the whole jq£. the evidence.
—Can yon my what* in yonc oponion, ia the cause. of-A^r. C^W^ death?

LoBdCAMOWOM.'^ThUviroakilmafmptmn^jm^hmvAh^ He died

from tatamo oenvidMcws ; by whish i aKai^< not the ditme- «f 4eti— W| bat eonvnteionft
aiinilar to these imtBesBed in twtatras*. ...

Mr. Keneale^. — ^Dd eoirnilskms of HlMkiiid'dceaaoMilff aasaaie the tmtme of epHepsy^f
Yes. — Are there more kindis of convulse disease* Ibe ori^ ttf whicb' i^ unkBcyim ? I
know of no department of pMhotogy whieb i» msope obscure thin that of emivnlBive dis-
eases ; I have seen post-mortem examinations after death frdi» eownlsioBtB.' — AnA yoa
have been able to discover no trace which would canse those convnlsions ? I have been
present at post-mortem examinatiens of persons who £ed finom conwlsive diseases ; I
Itave sometimes seen n& morbid' it^peactmee whatever, tmd in other etkseS' the nlorbid
appearances which were tfeibl^ were^common to a variety of dfeeases ; the lattei* do ne*
appear to me snfteient to- ac^trtif ftr the death which tfllok phice ; convulsive diseases
undoubtedly depend very much on the state of the nerves ; they are ril eomseeted wi&
disorders of the iwrvotia ac^o&^the bcain 'faa» great infliienoe in- prodocitig convulsive
diseases^ but the spinal cord has a greater influence. — Woidd the presence of gritty gra-
nnies in the neighbourhood of the spinal cord be likely to jprodoee convulsive diseases i
It would. — ^Does it appear that there is a distinct term applied to swh a case, the name
of spinal epilepsy; is there such a name? There is such a disease as spinal epilepsy, -
which is accompanied by strong convulsions, which might resemble in a great degree
those described in the present case. — ^Would periodicity belong to cotivulsions arisinjg: from
spinal epilfepsy ? * Y<s, it would do ; I should say from the evidence I hare heard Mr.
Gdok's mode of Hfb would pnediBpose Mm to apoplexy. — ^Have yoor tamed your atCention
to the petooB of <stfychma'? I h»ve witnessed some expetineiitB aad perfbrmed a few; I
mes'gtting to a»dd I have prescribed it medicinally.

Lord Cami^eix. — In cases of paralysis ?

Mr* Kencaley, — ^Have you detected it in the blood and the liver ? I was present at an
analysis |)erfonned by Mr. Herapath.

Cross-examined by the Attorney-General,

You say the convulsions of e^lepsy sometimes assum/& a tetanic character ; how many
cases have you seen of epilepsy in which that has been the case 2 In aUr cases of ejnl^y
there are -violent conKuisions; I- cannot tell you how many X have seen, assume a t&tanic
charaeter ^ perhaps SOt-— Woi^you say that? Yes/*^Has it.giQine as far as opisthotonos?
Not 1^,ex|lireme opisthotonos, not the opisthotonos of tetanus^ tha whole body has been
siraightdUed'Out; and. tfaehBad thrown hmrk. — ^bt the sym|Btom&.ofjBarked.opistlu)t<iQos?
A slight degree rather of opisthotonos ; I attended to the description given by Mr. Jones
of the symptoms of Mr. Cook ; that the body was so bowed" that he could not raise it ; so
TuWed'that itwoald lean upoi^its heels and d^* bank of its headrif it hod been turned over.
— ^Have yon ever seen epilepsy like that? I havo'sete it ititfiw sine degpee.-^HaTe you
ever seen aj|(^h(iog' in- epilepsy s^pvoaeibifng to it? - 1 can onl)^ report wti^t I sai<i^ behove \
I haye^^ever seen ai^;fthing appFoachiug to it— I will put the symptoms that did occu? in
tibjs case ; ha.ve you ever seen a body so stiffened by spasms as this i I have seen the body so

stiff th^it if you attempted to lift up the hand . — Bat have you ever seen it so that you

coulcl not Bft it at all ? You ciau lift* the body with suiheieai; force j I have never seen
It so that the^.ody would rest on th© head and heeis. — Is that a symptom peculiar to
tetanus? Ton me^ tetanus- the disease. — I mean" what you medical men properly call
tetanus ? You may have convulsions of the same character eccarring from other causes,
tetanic convulsions from the operatioa' of various poisons. — I am putting to you natural
dise&se, or natui^l tetanus^ 1'am mrt dealh*^ "with poisons-; ifeep to natural di<sea9es : did you
#ver know thei^ ifpsiept&Eos of opil!rtho«bti<M>, Hi 'tilait shape or tM» that «xteBt; ar^seHom
anytKin*^ mit tetknus ? Ndt\wthi« vAj o«#n «tpferie*c© ;- 1- havw- wad of epilepsy fteing
aeeompanied with tetanic conviM^tiS.'^ENrt ;fe»tc havenev^r net thSs misHrotonoe hi liie
fbfm I am n«w spealdng of?'' Tfce^dejgrte wa* ftot' mentioned- it hau oeen nuffelysiiid
seeompanred by opisthotimoB:' as ftlr' a^^ «iy^te«periwiee goes, epitep^y, when if asiSixmes
that mailed character, is •SRsciAtBpagied' with'^trnCMiseionsnesst IhivW sead^la a ea0e<rf'
Br. Marshall Hall that sometimes unconsciousness is not present ; he does no«fwedCiMi

2!aiIXfl DAY, Mat 23^. IS56, 259

whether death took pfaM& in tiiis case or not. — ^Does that make all the dlflterenee?
Undoabtedly; the disease would be more severe. — Can joa give me a smg^e case that
yott knbv of, either of 'your own ex^^rienoe or on leoord in medioal wetks of a«thotit}*,
where- there has bee» deaith 'from; epileiMgr, and con^Mo — aeBs has conttniied ? I caanot
gire yoa tiw nariMive of «ay ease; bst if death hui oemnred in Dr. Marshall Hall's case
that ireuM have suppled them : Dr. MnrahaH Hall ia livi]ig.--^]a this elTf ? I do not
know.-- You said, in teusmn to my fnend, thatt gritty gtalnilfli vooM be likely to produce
coBvitlsi^e diseases ; n^iat e&tent of development, myoor judgment, most took granules
reach to prodoee an 'a^on> in- the- sfooaA VMOffOwi 1 slKNild say there- is no relation
between the tfiae«fi ihaggMiiilea— d the exiMt of the 'Oficotptedaced. — ^Woold you expect,
when they began to^atto that siae, that wooid have- aaif efiect on the nervons system ;
if they woold begin to ^ow their effieet mwe or less gradaaliy ? No> in epilepsy I hivre
nwr9^ obseryedr aaveral gcsoales in the mem^iraoa of thd brain ; and any distnrbtng
canse m^ the •system L think would be Ukely to prodnce convulsions ; I belieye that the
giaaules ia thiS'Oase were veiy Ukely to have initsted the spinal cosd, and an attack might
vory likely come on. at .onoe in a £t of ep«lepsy»- There would be pain during the oonti*
nosaee of .the'violent ^asms of the patient, not neoesearily pain merely from the spasms.—*
Are you speaking now of the disease which Mr. Partridge called araichaoid ? ^o ; Uiese
gnuiulsa m^^ or might not produoe that disease. — You- would ex^ct to find inflamma-
tiea in.thait case? Not neoessanly; irritation, not inflammation ^ granules of that
descciptaon do not often exist in healthy spines ; I hs«re«eTer met with any surface so
bQaotifttUy smooth and polished as the dura mates, a«Kl you do not meet with any rough-
nefis there ; in the dissections of epilepsy in the lar^ heepitaU these small gmaules hare
be^a found very frequently ; the granulee, in my opinion, wi^ild be likely to produce
epilepsy ; in my experience I have neirer known epilepsy unaccom^ianied by nneonsdoue*
uesfi} nor have I ever known epilepsy producing the markfed symptoms of tetauio
character which occur in Mr. Cook's case^ — Do ^u feel yourself warranted m. giyiag an
opiuon.th^t these granules caused' ^lepsy in this case^ I think I might haye done so.^^
Weuid yon undertake to state your opinion that they did ? If I put aside the hypothesis-
of poissnixig by strychnia I would ; sevend of the symptoms desccibed by Mr. Jones^- the
seveie paronysn, the stiffening of the body, the eonvulsioBS of aU the mu8<des of the
tmnksjid the limA>8, and the complete opisthotonos, are also cosnmon to other eonvulsionft—M
I ask you whether they were symptoms consistent with death by strychnia ? They ara>
certainly consistent with that view. — They are the symptoms that you would expect after
strychnia? I think there would have been some slight premonitory symptoms ; if I bad
no other case to which I could ascribe the death I should ascribe it to epilepsy. — But in
this case you admit some of the sylhptoms are inoousistent wi^ your experience erf*
epilepsy ?~-Ye8.

. ^l^^-^tsmined by Mr, Serjeant Wiee,

Orin.yonr refldihg>P' They are consistent with ^e possibility of epilepsy ; they are
consistent with oonYolsions of an epileptic form, ending in death,- though perhaps not^
actaally amounting to epil^y ;. apil^sy itself is rather an ol|}ectionable term, and has
heen objected to by some eminent writers. — Supposing it to haye been actual epilepsy, at
what period of the last attack should you say tne epilepsy commenced? When Mr. Cookr.
sat up in bed and cried cai^i I should imagine that would be the sense of suffocation tvhiclfci
would be the premonitory symptoms. — :A:fter the final shriek, by throwing himself back, in '
his bed^ is there any symptom from whick you. could inler, . consciousness after' ihati
moment? Exoepttlmt he swallowed some pills. > n

The Attomey^Oeneral.t^AJdo^ ine to remind. yo«L he asked them to t«r& hisi^^yrer. • '
Mn Serjeant Shee, — Imagine the sym|»tomi to which iny -learned iHend ref^T^W ohlis-*
thotenos were mentioned j- would you condidet that a body ^hii^ item#di!at«ly or'witMtt^
ten minutes after death, when it is quite warm, lay perfectly stttiight, the hfttids^xt^dcd,
resting on its heels and its back and it$ head, wa^ in a State of opisthotonos f iN^ifit
rested on its back ; in my judgment it might} be ' that the, body mighf ^Suntfe, Vithbut
actual rigidity, tie bow-like shape and appearance which has been Spoketi J)f, and yet;"
when turned over, lie flat in the bed, resting on the head, baek^ and he^ls.

Dr. BENJAMIN WARD :RICiURbsON;.swor»..-r^Exawinedby JVIr. Serjeant Shoe,.
Are yon a physidanipiactising in XioodoQ, and a. licentiate of the fACult^ of physicians
and surgefms in Glasgow ? Yes ;. and a member o^ tb^ College of Physicians hers, — ^I
beheve you hayeneves seen a case of idi(^»thi« or tfaunuUio tetpnos ? No ; but I have
seen a eonsidesabl&namber of 4eatha by eonyulsiens>; and! haye known those esses when
they have ended in death sometimes assume tetani^HZQ appearances, without being,
stdctly speaking, tetanus ; I haiw seen the muscles Qs»i, especially the musdes in the
outer part of the body, the arms stretched out, the hands closely and firmly deoahed,

260 TBML OF :WILUUM FAUf£R.

which o<mtiniieftimtndealii«-*-4iB!r»ijG0RoiKciHred 'ft Mose of . snflboBtiftndwlli^^tMff?
I haye ; I fhoold like to oocreci ihe but mmmer, and My I hanre sMii the fatin|dt>eili»d4d
in cases whero death loek pUoe in^my pFescBoa-i-^iaTe 700 kaovn taiiy «i>iitoHBoii"«f
the legs and feet in aoiAd initaoees3> In some pertion of the ^hadiesv^of the le^
and feet; and the patWnlyif eamaioas^genendly desires to'sit ^.-^Hsv^Tou known
persons die from a disease-caUcd anj^napeDtora*? < I have?; aad'tfae syniptoras x>f the
disease, when it is fatal, leseodilricloecl^ ithe ^mptoBM t&tT^tm psMSjysBis in which
Mr. Cook died; angina pe^dris* is -classed amongBi^e'COBlrnteitb.or«pa«siodlK diaeasGs.
Has it anydistiae^e featai3e)in past-amrtflniiijexainnKitlon?- >lfo dibtinotive.i^tsve;
probably under some cvounatanote'liieile .may te disease iideteolabie.-M:t^Ocaeiaii7, I
presume, detectable? By no in!taam,-r**ySill-iy9m> state iwfaalp.v^n^toms'ttf :th6 disease,
when it has proved fbtiJ, ^ioup«rticiiiariys«ferio»aairesemblmg'tiDQiEelhatjfaaye been

'Stated in the ease of <Cook? I doiddmotdoibettOQ thandesciibe' a case which *i myself
saw: aehild^ ten yearS'Of ag^,'.WBs:'nnder my oar^ in November, 1860.)LimippDsed 'she
had suffered from aearlet>ffirvcr^sheihad.a.sfiglit ftiwrish attack; sfaesveeoverod'Seikr
that my yisits. eeased on the Mth of NoYember:;' I left her -wnnsBil .andfanevry- snathe
momiag; at halif-pasttenlwss called to see bsr dying; she was: supported ttprigi»i%t
her own request by ber«8ister; the' face was^pole^ the whole of the fiice tigid^ die- amis
rigid, Uie £ngevs- (Aencib^f- the respiratory raaoeles eomfdcteiy fixed ' and- -rigid ; and with
all compUuaedof an intense a^oDjr and restliBSBoess such as I have neTer witnessed ; ihete
was perfect coiiseioUsnass;''tha«hildiknew aiie, and expressed her mtense agony 7 etigtiij
took from my hands, some brandy-swL-watBr.from a spo<m; I left at tslmt laaie'ibria
special reaaoar to. get some.ddoroform for the purpose of produciag-Tdazation h^ <dilon)-
form vapour; on retarning^) the head was thrown back ; I coold detect no reqiiration ;
the eyes remabsed fixed «ipeny and the body just resembling a fit ; she was dead ;' Ldid
not obsenrewfhciher the ri(for fnortia came on at its usual time or later; on the fUlb whig
day it was on when I made a post-mcn>tem examination ; unfortunately i left tfae'hody in
the arms- «f the sister, and 'Of ooorse it was laid ont afbeTwards, and I eannot speak as to
the symptOBls;*-^Will- you state to the Court what yon observed on the po8t*inortem
examination -B. The. bmin was slightly congested; a portion of the upper part of &e
spinal cord seemed. nonnal ajid healthy ; the lungs were collapsed ; the heart was in sach
a state of -firm spasms and so empty, tha^ I remarked it might have been rinsed out, .it was
so perfectly clean >and free- from blood. — ^Did you find any disease which -ooald bare
caused death ?t No ; there were no appearances of functional distnrbanoe trxcept a -slight
el^ion of serum in one pleural cavitv, I forget on which side; I believe the ri^t side ;' I
examined tbeoi&er part of the spinal cord, and it was in a normal.' state ; they toU^me
the child was unusually well at supper, and very merry ; that •she then went to bed- with
her sister, and in lying down suddenly jumped up and said *' I am going to die," and
begged her sister to rub her ; there had been nothing of the same kind in the family ; the
fjiSier was theii dead.—Wha^ was the age of th^ mother? — ^Tbe mother was a woman of

■ fifty year^/of ^g(B fit the time. ^^ , . ' ■ . ■•

• Doiltuadetfitaad you to say that in joUr opinion it wiiis^a^case otf /angina pectoris?

/ .i de> ;• /itaccoids with ali ithe descriptHms of angina peetoris by;the hest aothors.^^— What

;• utatfaoist?. Lathtai; I Watson,' ^oycav in iPrancev J'ratt, and Sir Bve^ett Holme.— What is
the nature of the complaint of angina pectoais? That is ^uifeanother question ; it.arises
from ossification of the smaller muscles of the h^art : that is the.ppipion. of Dr. Jenner.
— ^What is the true nature and (^aUse of stngitia' pectoris f U lias been laid down as a
'caseddr fi4nbh'4&Cfr^ is diseesei ofthe'coiiDnary Tessels inthe'heort, Talvuiar diseacse bf the
Qieart^'SiidiseBse^ the .yaJ^S'X)f thehtanUl tkcM have tbetn many cases in which there

^ hBS'beed nbdisoovenwl cause; Iiknow itidsrjhugiiiariptetaris'as Id6 enery other disease ;
we assume, from certain classes of symptoms, what the disease is, and we <eail"^io6e

/ dis Wfl > ;"M') -' ,t.v.i.;l ,•»• ;■, '.1 ].'. .f'. ..q •..; f)fr.f.// : .• rn ,.-,

Mtt/ tBAisnri AiittBRSOst^Whyf isriit hailed aiii^ma |Heotori» ^ Oppression of the chest :
it is- marked by that. \ iroi^iiifiij* -..it ^t ;,'.i' ' .. •

Tbeu4tt()rafi|^PKilmyrfdt/,»«^oiaj8&y}'tfacfae ilai^ibeen ioases^ of angina pectoris, Of"! those
symptoms which you class under angina pectoris : are not those sjravptoms that would be
produced by taking sti^chnia ? NqI exa^t jvr ; the difierence is this : in angina pectoris
the patient requests toberutioe^ to give retfer: 'ich^ hands ^nerally are rubbed. — ^Have
yoB not kdowak'thaiC dtoi^P'UivtaateiOf'fftrjitchttilb ?' 'l- have not seen.' a -case of strychnia
poison.***4n yourread&ng?- >iitii|ayt be 'aoi;<'Ii 'think not.^-*Did you hear the Leeds case?
Assuming that that was a case^of sKryishaia; I do 4 1 Haust say the two forms are so srtrictly
analogous, that I feel there ^trouldbe htrvsevy- (great <diflkuhy in detecting •one; from the
other.-^IndeteetlDg wha*? lU'diMtiagaisbdng^nginiifinm stxyehsiarlwishtoaddv

mSTfJL DAT, Ift&T 28, I8S6(. 2KS1

tlus d^^EatfMe, tlatitigiiffe isparoxysBiiili'it occes wiit goes^-mnd 'rti/ cfc cia wovld not

•bfe 80 ibbely..to do tbai.; yoa ironld not expeot it fiir. many iftoiMiis.^^But in this case 70a

are speaking of it ended in the ^ttt paraasysm ? Yes.— That is a ease 70a are ascribing

- lo' angina peetoris? TeS) as regards »one, lio dififerenee.^-I ask vou this: how then can

jjcm: be justified^ in oases wkeie yea. dis co vur no -abnormal conditions of the heart or its

artitiiea^ in' setting !dDirai ^tededth totoiginai?' J^nraiaely aa-if I saw the symptoms of

epilepsy, I thoidd^aocepfcthenMB.siioh.'^-Saj^po^fBg the disease iras referable to two canses,

in the a fcs e ne c ' of'aU-efndmice' >wkai •>» yonr-irieason ftr settins it d6wn to one in

preference 't». the other? l>^nite /admit iluA in that case, if Inatd knoim as much

of the .Batare off latiyelini&.as I dd boh, i shovld^hftve* gme on to make analysis;

I have had'4>nly tviQ4iaaBa.0f tfaiS' dtsoriptite, Andil hare heard of another one. —

What wtia the other, on^ ^ The odher one 'wais «xiaae of' organic disease of tine heart ;

I cannot spdedL exactly ds to the proportidn the cases of Imgina pectoris bear to casM in

Tf hich aa in*6gnlar symptams Hars been diacofneired^ hot I believe im sijt or seven cases,

<r probably more, Uiere has been bd ^paliwlo^eal '11688011 fbr' death discovered. — Is this

<dts«ase of angina peotons attended twith poin^ symptoms bedfbaa it 'tacminittes in death ?

Moat fMunlni'ir-^f'or haw lo&g? The parcHEvam^'taaniBathigiin' death may ran on fbr

more ihaii eight ndnalM; it oosKsion sBddeBly;-*HAad kitta at idie first attaek? Not

alwiftya ; not generally .^-^It genevally sproada- itscdf over a cartain 'period' of titie ? I pre*

flttlne it does; generally ^-^Ydn said tiiat the head Wvm sonesrheat' bent baekf; was that what

^««Id be ceiled, ia iba aiedieal aeBse o£ iSae wsondy ofiisthibtooo^i'the body resting on its

head and heels? Granting that a. body is sitting- ap'.wigieni' see it^ I cannot conoeiYe

▼jhat the posttion mi^t be; there was rigidity, not itnMMintiBg<td opisthotoML bat still

Tery ouuked : the neck was so stiffly bent bade, thai if tfae body had been laid down, atkd

tbd lower Umbs, which I did not see, had been the same, I have no doubt that wonld be

. S07 I idid not look at the legs to speak with accnraoy about them.-i— Y6ti did not pay any

attention to -die lower extremities? No. — Did you send a note of the ease to any pal>-

lioation ? No ; I bdieve I reported it to the Medicid Society «f London.^'With regard to

^rilepsy, you say in epileptic convulsions you have seen the hands clenelied firmly till

death ; did yon ever see them so long after death ? I have seen thein firmly olenehed,

not in epilepsy o^y. — ^I am speaking of epilepi^; in what cases have yoa seen thtaoa

firmly denized after death? In cases where there has been ^violent- eonvnkion^ lesw

th^m once from hsemorrhage, and where the convulsiona were violent.^**4n other< xBases

liav€ you, besides hsemorrfBige ? I can only say in a general sen^ I hatre Seen-tiie

bands clenched over ^d ovier again, and have paid no attention to it.-**In what olas^ of

•cases? My belief from seeing people die is that the denehing of the faandi-is,- in>aiaay

oases, mere matter of accident. > ■ ...Hi. ..u

\ -^-eXQjDined by Ur. Serjeant Sh^e, ' ' ' ; " ,' " ;'

Have you known cas^s personally or from your reading that patients recover' from
angina pectoris, and whether within a short time afterwards they ^metimes ha,vejinother
attack ? They do, sometimes in so short an interval as 24 hours. — ^Buring the interval
between the two attacks, what i» the eondition df Ate-patleAt'? Perfectly healthy to all
a|ipcavanee8.>f*«iA.ite liBa'j6]rm|»tomsi deaorvbed in ithe . evidence ■ mnrg liter^toaayuiptU n s of
ang^uia pectoris 'O^ stryohma poifoa.? Splialang.' sciea^ifiosiMyvi li ishoald >'oartainlyf • day
nisgiaa peotoxb.-^^Yodx liad in reason iof ianyiMad tik:«as|tec*< 'poison > nf • 1 anjr kindiioitf that
caney either hefiyre'OtinawjdurjN'otithfe islightest;-"; ]> ■• / ut.i". ;.., <>in 't<< *titu;ti uir

, Dr. f-piili^^DS^reca^cj;^!^ ij,_ %:, ^n'h^^PI^^T'^l.lT^

In yoar oiHyaio&,/wh0Dith8fsti!yQiuaia>po|Son(ta>abBarbed'inleitiieiq^
diffused by the-«ireulaiioBMOf itiusi hhud tkrengh thd< •system, fHrtdws-itieofrlacti'aabiQie
tissees ? I should 'think, it. dsr- disused thixiugheat . ihfe .entire ayatemyr if <it be flvimlly

Lord Campbell. — ^That eflPect would be produced by circulation ? CertMnly, my
Lord : I was going to observe i^ waiild>d^itod mi-ihiel fiipidity.'waflifArhiBk/. death, takes
place after the absorption. — ^That is the diffusion? Jcsi /li b ,Au,\.i ... .i

The ^^omey-^fen^a/.-t^^No^iithe-efii^nfdetfe -alssiirp^iiHii' /Ne,^tlHi<dl]fiasion,iand'ion the
quickness, of circulation* i' '■•i- .!., .^'-loi-* ^q jriiuii-s 'i«i' ■• •-.•'lU'* .u»^ji.iii'* fji.i"»'j.i> ,-

Cros^-exammec^ py the Attoryiay-GcncraL /^

Would the length of time which e)a|»es .betw6en4hn takingtoC tkei tstrychaia and the
deatli be likely to be; attended by motoe .eoibplete absorptidn ? ' Ifdio not*oompletely under-
stand your queslion.— Would the abd^rpijnii bermore'coteplete if & longer -time were given
jBbr the process between the adnnntstration and the death ?• Cettahily^ it would be.<^Is
that supposing a miaimaia dosfl gisrensufficiest^Ki dtotixiy IvSo^ if «.lMig interval elftpses

^/%, :• 'A- M ^ I— S-

l»^ 4itf .Wf «^ li^- >U:

*<^s. ^^fl» \n^ <^:y»^j^ / l.^tf'lf^i^ f fl T*^ 6^<

^ - > » ** -•

Id «i*;^ ''Jk y^ %0*r 1t^^ Jii > wm s ^d^Sft vekeir lie

TEXTH DAY'S TEIAL.

M^y 24, 1850.

OIJ VMtt I'KMHKHTOV, 16iq., fwdm.— enmined liy Mr. &r;><iR^ ^e«.

f huOttva ^«m Am libit ii!«tfiitT or t«»efaer of medicine at Qoseen'? College, Bir-
miMntiiWuy Of MWl0my,'«-Aiid fttpgecifi t(ia hotpital? The Cteaeral Hospital at BtP-
mtNH^tMNi' '- VVurit yim f9mm\i ftt «h4« nmmftnitlon of tlM body of the late Mr. Ckx>k, aflber
\\t \im\ \t¥m^ «iiilMim«Nl in ihn month off JaiMuini> or Febraafy? ■ I'trasz-^Did yiaai abettv t n
rttn MiiMiUlim iKf ih* Nfflnal ttord? I did.«-^Wftf.k taiyovp jwdgmaot ia a eonditioK' tm
mmU\Hf9Mt k» Mtiilit witii MMitUUttoo Ift whait itMe it had beon^uMiiodMitdkjr a£t»rthe durth
iHf < h«» lUiiimiiMii / ii (iMtaiiil^r wan tioti. *- TV'iU yow (rtalewhat iti e»Ddttie& waa that wf
liM liii Mill (lit* Jill y itiuy JiuiuM '/ 'V\m uppur part» wtew the brain had.lieea.depaTated, vaai
l^tuKdUi ualiHii' (Vtiiii (liM itlWati of dt^oompoiition ; the rewauung. poctioD^ though fairly
jifMnrivvil (^lii M tiody hurUnt (wu itioiithv^ was fo loftas not toeDable me to form any
ifl4iUiM4»»alit'iliN|iiloliimia(ilat«ly ttlWdmlh. •

'■ rniM-tiie»mlntHl by Mr. 'j4W?)Ai<y-^(*ft(?Mr.

ViMi \\\\\ luif NtfiM tl»0 biuly tin \i liml boen opened twenty-four hours? I do not know
llim iimuy liiiui'Ni but It wmm thu day ni^r thu buiuy oanal had been opened.— Would the
lAHMitHi^ of \\\^\ h«M^y oaim) iDipoto tno tiitvHoi^ tnlistanoe of the cord to the atmosphere?
*l\i w immMwIu i>iitt»ni'| but it W»« HtUI wvomt with i very hard, dense membrane; it was
lit lit ^ni^T^Mttd. Thai m^luhmw* b«d «ut been opened r No, — Just recollect yourself?
I atii Mui vni'ii) Mu It (a my IntnntMkin datid^dly that the outer covering, what is termed
(b«i »^♦»^« H,»f^«, >VM aot ^HMUeJ lIH I wna pnmwut.^^^Yoa ai'O not sw^ abcmt that ? I have
MMd wv N^m aMi^uA^i, I th\nk>oaiho prisaaor'a bahalf^ I did.— Was there another
j,i^M^>«\ \\Ki^^\\\ rtw Whalf ^MT tht» pri«»oi\»i» Mi\ l^mer ? Yes, Mr. Bolton, of Birmingham.—
1 Hf» ^♦wvtVwim*)? Ywi. al gnt^*» <VUegt»,

\ \^ Ua%\ M^^ dvilWi^Mi^ t»f o|»UUm y

M^ 4flv^^an% iVMN^M^ II U a <|«««ii«u of tfhoi» and act a

MUTH' day, Mat », 1856. 26S

Mi^'. iSerfeant SMc-^l did not mik ^hat M¥. BbKoir said.

Mr, Attomey-GeneraL — I object to it; it is a question of fact, otherwise I should not
object;

Lord CAfflPBEUi. — ^We think the question ought not to be put.
Mr. Serjeant Shee.—'My lord, this closes the medical testimony.

Mr HENRY MATTHEWS »voii»;— Examined by Mr. Grove.
You are an iuapeetor Q£y(^tioa?. k^m, . - ,
Lord CAMPBeUi. — Where ? At^ Eoston Sqvara uaibraf' fltotian.
Mr. Gram. — Weoe you stationed ^hers' on Menday the ISth o£Koyember last? I was.

— What afternoon train or trains are tliere that stop at Eugeley ? At 2 o'clock in the

afternoon is the last train. , . /

Lord Campbeix. — ^At tfaait time there was a train ^ There wps.

Mr. Grove, — Nothing after that, I think you said!? No. — ^When does the express

leave ? At 5 o'clock.

Lord Campbeu^. — It left ait &? Yea-
Mr. Gtoiie.--Vfhm does it. g^t to* Stafford ? . At S'42:; k got to SltApd. that night at

8*45 4 the time it was due was at 8*42. n .

Mr. AtUfnie^'GMeml.-^llQ cannot know* thaet ; buti I make no daffieolty about it.

Mr. Grove.-^The distance from Stafford to Rugeley i^ how much? By railway 19
iniles.-^And by the road? I do not know. — Can you say whether" 5^ is mot« or leSB?
I cannot. — ^Is that the qmckeat mode o4 getting ta Ea^eley by the express train, and by
road after the afteraoon tcabi leaves ? It is.

Lord Campbell. — ^That is the quickest way ? Yes. — After the 2 o'clock train ? Ye«»
my lord* — ^By express ? Yes.

Mr. Attorney-General, — I have nothing to ask this witness.

Mr. JOSEPH FOSTER sworn.— Eataanined by Mr. Gray,
Are you a farmer and graaier at a place called Sibbertof t ? I am. — What county is
that in ? Northampton. — ^Did you. keep the Gkorge Hotel near Welfbrd in Northamp*
tonshire up to Lady-day last? - Yes. — Did you know the late John Parsons Cook for
any time before his death ? Manyyears.-^Have yoQ met hiaaa at varions places in the
hunting^eld ? Yes, scores of times. — ^And at dinner ? Yes, at different places. — ^Had
you any (^portunity of judging what was the state of his health and constitutioft? I
think generally a weak constitution. — From what circumstances which came under your
own observation did you form that jiuigment ? I foi^iied that jiudgiaei^'laieeQuae I had
been along with him, wh^^ he has iuid a bilieua attach and sick h^dsft^rf— Ar^ those
the only circumstaiijce^ from which ypu formed that judgment ? , Ye&, ^,,

Cfflss^eirawintfid byi Mr. JtuMB..

R&w long had yoa kanwn iiiwi? I thsak fwm B to lON^samw-'-ii*' kanteAi vcR^ctoly
iii^Northamptonshir««?. .SVr these lastyeaii' h» )uuK-*^iow' amajnbmwoi ikk ihie^ keeptf
Sonotimes two and semetiaMts tbree hutiter».-«-4 swpposs bfrhvMd- sootetiiaeff three or
fotiT times a week ? i dure say he has oa three days ; I sawftkiiBhthtee^lKys a^n^akLM.
Pretty regularly? Yes> pratty rogidarly when: he has been well.— Do yon know Mr.
Pell, whose name has boen ^called here, an attorney ait Northampton ? Yes*— ^Wasi tikere-
a cricket-dub at Welfbrd? Yes^ and there is now.*--W8» Mr. Cook a> member ^ Yes^
I saw him there, but not for these last three or fear years ; I cannot say .►-"Was the^aln^*
held at your house ? No, it waa held at the Talbot: Arms, at the cricket-ground.

Ixird Cai^bell. — You, did. ^lo^/^ee him, play ingj cnoket for tbiree .or ^uy y^ass ?. No*
Mr« Jantas.-^Where did ym* see Us^ C^ok laal befoye the- Idthi of, Novembet >i hefora
Shrewsbury races ? I saw him the last at Lutterworth some time about the middle of
October ; I cannot speak to theda^r ; I UHt him. m thetnuddle ef .the steaeU-^ad the
hunting commenced tliesu? No, X think not.r-When was it that he la^.had a sick head-
ache? Ithinkayearandahalf ago.r-Where was it that you sa* him when he had
the sick headache ? I saw him at joay own house ; he could not hunt that day. — Did his
horses stand at your stables ? No» ftevar v he oyfteu caUed.— He coiidd not go out hunting
that day ; did he come down to your house that day ? He was not well enough ; he did
not hunt that day at all. — Was he living with Mr. Jones of Lutterworth ? No, he was
xiot. — Was he dressed in his hunting-dress .when he called ? He was. — ^Was he out the
next day? I do not know Indeed. — Try and remember : hoWsoon after that did you see
him, after the headache? I cannot speak to the time j' 'about a week or so; I cannot
speak to the tim. -'

206 TIUAL OF WILUAH PiUIEB.

cwear tl»t ]i« has never 'pud jov expeaies «f tiviiig.4l jnjxsibtrjMes? TeB.-<-'8ai
will ? Yes. — ^He n^Ter paUl your expeoBtf ? No^^- Wbmt do jon 'vem by o^ing '^ if lie
did thejr v«re dedacted o«t of the biU T* I worked ior hiin#*--HM he paid yamr qifeuiMs
at •tlier new, and bare y«ii dodacted that from yoa]* bill ? He never yaid no other tet
the fihrewibuiy laoee ; be paid what the .expenseatfieTe weine; we ^ned together, and it
was ^ot in the bill ; I offerodto pay okine^ sum! he 0»idhe lioiild p^srit — ^Hc has not done
that at other races for yoar dinistg ? No, h« nerer i>aid nowhere' besides Shafwshury.—
Thatt yon will swear ? Yes* — Wese you al tBcm wkh hias tha yeac before ? Xdaae say
I was ; I cannot raeoUeot* — Wen yoaat rsAes with, him in the j«ar 1654 ? Yies.~rA± haw
many ? Perhaps about two or .three, I cannot cail it to my nund how many. — ^Have yoa
been with Palmer since he has heeia in SlafGord gaol.? I was atStafford in the gaol thire;
I saw him with Mr. Smith. — ^Pld yen have an inlernew with Ptilmer in Stafford gaol?
I was there ouce. — How long were yoa with himi Abont a couple of horns.— When was
that ? I did not take any account of it : I should think a month ago, or 5 weeks : I can-
not tell to a week when it was.' — Was it since the tme bills jrere fonnd against him at
the Stafford Assises ? 1 cannot exae^ <SaU to ray mind; I never tocA no notiee ; I saw
him at Stafford. — ^Were yoa not with him in the gaol saoce the tme bills were fonnd
against him at Stafford Assizes? I cannot «ay.*-Since the Stafford Assizes ? I eannot
say whether it was beibre or after I saw him there X was there.— How eame you to go?
Because Mr. Smith said he was going, and I thonght I would like to see him. — Yoa were
with him for abont iWip hours 9 Yes, I was^ — Had yon been in tiie habit with Palmer of
betting upon hit horses ? I have liow and then stood half a aoveveign or a sovereign ; that
was the most I ha;ve'done. — Did he put you on his horses aecasionally ? I merdy stood
half a sorereign or a soverdgn ; that is the most I ever did. — Do you net knew wliat I
mean by that phrase ? Yes, I do. — ^Did you bet at Shrewsbuiy f No, I did not. — Net
on any of his horses th^6 ? Not upon any of Bfr. Palmer's horses at all, and no one
eOse's. — ^Did you back Mr. Go^^'s marc Polestar ? No, I did not. — When you ha've
betted a sovereign or half a sovereign, has it been at races where Palmer's horses have
run ? Yes, or any other horse ; I was not tied to his alone. — ^But did you bet with
Palmer ? No, I had nothing to do with betting with Mr. Palmer. — But on the same side
with him: hsrre yoo had a part of his bet, and stood with him upon a horse? X have
stood a sovereign.^**-With IVilmer? Yes. — ^What time did you see Mr. Cook cm die
Wednesday evening -at the Baven ? I started fvom Stafford, I believe, at 6 o'clack.*--At
what tiise at the Haven did yon first see Mr. 0€>ok ; you said you saw Mr. Cook and
Palmer at the fiaTen? You asked me what tiine X saw Mr. Cook.— Yes, at the Baven,
m Palmer's eompaoy ? I saw Mr. Co<^ by himsdf^ he was the fivst. — ^What time did
ywx tee Mr. Cook in XHikner's eom|>any at the Baven on the Wednesday night ? As near
,19 o'clock as peaaible.— ^Had you been dining with Palmer ? Kb, X had not. — ^Whexe
had you dined ? At home, at Bsgeley.— >At what time did you get to -Shrewsbury on
Wednesday night? X Should say Bboat 8; it nnght havs been between 8 and 9; I
sh(OBldi£Hicgrat <ir<mUU^~iIowsoon did you see Pakner aftec aniving at Shrewsbury on
•the Wednesday dngliS? I wsntto the it»vea; X knew the room that Palmer general^
had, being there before; X went up 4o see if Paimer was- in^ — ^Abeat what time was that ?
X went directly fusm the lailway station, betireen 8 and^d ; I went straight np.-^X>id yoa
go into the room. at the Baven, to Palmer's tmua. ? The fimtaa I saw against the roon
door was Coeds, and he said, *' HaUoa i i^iat faringe yx)u here V' he was by the door
sntside' buttoning his ooat: X told him I was come teniae hfow he vcas getting on. — Bow
soon did.you gointo Palmer's room ? Palmer was gone oat ; then I went into the town
a while.>*HHow soon dad you get back'to4he room in the Baven where Palmer was ? — I
should stippose I migfat be alront an hemr out — Yon setumed 9 Yes, and went into the
aoom.

Xord Campbell. — ^You went into Palmea^s sitting-room? Yes.

Mr. Jc^m^^ — Wqs Palmer there, or did you :wait till he eame back? No, he was not
there^^^Did jou wait in the .sitting-room till he came ? Yes^ there was a person of the
name of Shelley there, a betting man. — ^How long were you waiting there before Palmer
came ? X should sajaifPiiitle of hours or more ; X cannot say to half an hoar. — ^About
«rhat time do. you say it .was when Palmer came in ? X should say about X2 o'clock
as near as. possible ; ,X canuQt jsay to half an hour ; I had no watch and saw no clock. —
Did he come in alone ? He .came with Mr.., Cook. — ^Mc Cook was the worse for liquor?
Yes. — You saw that w^e« he came an ? Yes^— Wiw he very drunk ? No. — Xlather ?
Yes. — So mnch the worse for luinor that you could easily see it ? Yes, X could. — ^How
soon after Mr. Cook- came in the worse for liquor was the brandy-and-water produced?
Directly. — ^How was it served? Brought in a decanter. — And the water? The water
""'ri,t be on the table; X cannot say how it came in. — Were .there any tumblers on the

TSKTH i>AT» May Si, 1896. '3S&7

laKle ? Yes, tlure wag, and w«4r8i)k U ont'io-tiltfs tiiflAlfrs.-^W«ffl they all ^mnght up
'together, the tmnblerg and the bnmdj? I shauid my they w&se, — ^knd the twater ? I
do Dot say that it vaa; the waiieit might be theve^ it^geaendlf 4s Iha leaae.— Do yen
remenber Meg. Broaka. eoniag? Noi, I do net.*— Do yOu itseoBect Paftmer being -ediled
oat «f the roon to $^eak to her ? No, I 4o net.— J>o 7«a<raMAleflt Mr. Fiaher «oiBiBg
in f 1 remeoolier a gentleaum conung in^ bat I -iisiiie not the pteaore «f JmoviDg 'him. —
Do you net Imow now that it was Mr. Fisher? I know him by eaHing when Ik «ame ;
he came by my shopu-^^-Do yon know now that it was Mr. flsW ? I anow there was a
gentleman of the name of Fisher. — Do you remember the pers€B» whom yen now know
to be Mr. Fisher coming in ? Yes. — ^Bafo^e Mr. Fiaher 'had come in did Palmer take out
a glass of brandy-and-wal^r anct leave the room, before Mr. Fisher came in ? No, he
did noC*~^II9art-yoa wSH swettr t Yetf/**-0f afanythiie that evening before they went to
bed? Y3ee.-*#tateier,*>I naderMiiaoid yon to' say, never felt the room from the time he
joined yosin the lOOm wUlb. Codt ^nlQ -you 'Went 'to* bed? YeSi— ^Yon swear that
po^vdly? Yes»-*^itting «k}Se "to ' hitti, yon observed him ' the -whole time? I was
aittiog^loBe to iumi^^-Wheti >Mp. Fisher -ettrnfe' in ^^T^lmef tisk Mr. Cook to have some
morebrand^-and-waterP No; Mr, (>K)fc asked Palmer.'— What did Pdlmer say? He
said he'wom i»t hanwasy SMrenaless he dxank his br«iidyii>tnl^-wiltet^ — Yon say that
Mr. Cook was ^e wome for Hqiior, was tlmt errhtemt'^ tatf c«ie? Yee^ t vawit very
phUn.^ — P^SMTwas sitting next to yon, .and ymk-dlm»t^^ fhait lie' was the worse fbr
iiqnor? Co<^.— And Palmer sat doss to yoti-?> Faimer«ict«leBe%6 me and >Cook -sat
neact him; if it was Fisher he was at the ftir aide.--^almiev said, i vhall not hxve any
more till yon driok yoors; did Mr. Cook thsn •say, ^ I will diniik 'mime," and ^d he
drink it at a drausht ? He did.— Directly after he had draiik H did ' hess^, ** Theve Is
something in it"? Yes, he did make a remai^ ; he tbongitt it was not ^ood^ — Upon
your oath did he not say, " Thsre is something in it" ? lie didiSBytheie was oame-
thmg in it.-^Did he say, ^' It bums my throat dreadtfally '* ? Ko, I do not know that 'he
did. — ^Will jon sw«ar lie did not ? He ^lid the > brandy'^and-'water w«s <B0t •good.

Ix>rd Campveu^ — ^Will you^wear he did not say it hxrmt ids ihroat ? Yes, I will.

Mr. James.— Will you swcmt he did not say, " It burns my threat dreadfiiUy" ?

Yes. — ^And nothing to that effect? Yes.— You wUX? Yes-r—NoAhing of that kiajd?

Yes. — ^Didhe use any other expression besides sayii^ there is saa&ethinginit? He

gave it to some one to taste. — ^And did he make any other observation ? fiio, he dad

not — What did he do then ? He gave it to some one to taste. — ^Who did he give it to ?

I believe to Mr. Fisher; I wUl not swear it was Mr. Fisher: he .gave it tofiometonetw-

It was not Palmer who did that, it was Mr. Cook ? I cannot say which it was ; it was

given to anoUier person in the room f aaad I beHove it^wa6 Mr. Fbdttr.^'^-Qo you know a

Mr. Read? No, J do not. ' I have heard the name. — Did a person whom yon noV

know to be Mr. Bead come in besides Mr. Fisher? No, I do notltnow such a^erson.^ —

How many persons weone there in the room when Mr. Cook drankthe brandytand^wnter

and said there was something in it? I believe there were but four^-^Shortly aSber <he

Jiad dmnk ft, and made use of that expression, immediately- after Chat the peison whom

yon now know to be Mr. Bead came in? No, I do not know him. — Did any othir

person come in ? I eannot say. — Try and remember how many came in ; had Co<^

emptied the glass very nearly ? As near as possible; there was a Iktle iQft.iB.--TDixi

Palmer touch that glass afterwards ? I cannot swear whether he did or not.-*-Will ywi

swear he did not sip what was left in ihe glass and say,y' There is nothing in if? I

believe he did taste it.*^HoWsoon after Mr. Cook had said thoreis something in it?

As socm as he had d!rank it he gave it to some one else ; I bdieve Mr. Fisher.pJdid

Palmer make any observation ? Yes, I believe he did. — What did he say ? That .he

could not taste anything was the matter with the brandy-and- water : I believe he, gave

it to Mr. Fisher and he could not* — ^Did Mr. Fisher, or whoever it was, say, *' It was no

nse giving me the glass, it is empty"? I^ Ji0t'k»ow;il>do'tiet>t«colle6tthat h& d!(j ; he

said he could not taste anylhing the matter with it.-^Upon'yo«fr ^oa^ did he not say,

** It is no good giving me the glass, it is empty" ? I cannot say. — ^Will you swear he* did

not ? I will not swear whether he did or did not. — How soon after.Mr. Cook iiad drank

'the 'brandy-and-water did h^ leave the room? I should say we were in the room,

perhaps, twenty minutes, it might have b^en half an hour ; I cannot say exactly. — D^d

he leave the room before you left to go to bed ? ' No.-^That you will swear ? Yes. —

Bid you go straight from the rooin up to "bed With PAlmerT Yes, we went both

together. — ^Did he leave the room at the same time with you to go to his room? Both

together ; ire both w0»t to the same room.< — You and PlSlmer? Yes. — Where did Mr.

Cook go ? We left him in the poom.— When did you hear that ni^ that Mr. t3t>6k.

had been vomiting and was ill ; how soon ? When Mr. Cook told 'me himself. — But

268 TRIAL OF, WIW'UV PfU^SB.

tliat night did yoa h«ar it ? I nerer h^fird

was ill.— How much branay-^nd-tratef aid ^ ^ 5M'**-.i^

there a glais apiece. — Was it cold watef or hot? Cold',#ater we Bad.— It had not Dpei
heated m any hnM vessel? leaniiot'sajr asything atyodftitf I tlranh mlfie. OA|the
following daj, on tfae.TtnMdqrv'ToailbuA ^^ MiMr/ fWlsasT^ I^«lltt;^i)dlMr.
Cook served me with what I had.— Where were yon ^inJ^lttieMaefltitlMtaikMd at
Ru^eley? At home the two dayL4w4 ^tbe^^f^of Um utqjmi^fir^ t9,pSnmn«hjj;
on Business. — During the'firat two days you were at hom^ at Rni^eij^x^ ir liraflr'^i^:

yon go to it? I did not. . ^ ,^ ^^ , .^u :;.):, >-.K.>.Li.iaiv v.o>.Aa /iK

B^zammed by Mr. Groce. e i,ua>q iiir 4irl »: •''

Have yon. been sobfNgr^oed ^^ IMfw«fKl»fit>M(<tlrit 4«at^ Jli^va»|.vA>&^«^ft^'
the other party h^rd whfkt X MilD J«y» ateH iu audi j^immMI «%tet»^4ltipt MpiiBirt
me with Mr. Crisp; J4<^«(kt4Ml^.wh<»''lbf 'Mitk|q#i^V€ln^lG^
interview at StaiB^i^ H^Uk ^aluierifri waaci^ 4«iinl7r9^vefMQ(0f lh9«Ml prfts^ dttivig
the whole ofjQfv^'mtfiit^\m2ti,l^}B»m$M^:i^^
person there; w)v> l4Qj»PlfrlMW'W...i'). i^ b.st -. ^ j/ '• n:,.: * ^i.i '»'l- .fi»,n 1 iir/yidi mrj

UirdG4MfMHii4.H-fiaiiu>^fR«Ml<iftli0igMVI i.Therd«nktti6flO0i9/tfolH^^lAi'<M>|^
Did yvra. talk al2 Mliabn^^hbifiat 9itMkamf JSe*, ^^d- maaM^ftlf tAiri«'Vlur'a^o«»!
his bn>theK.-r«*Afao9itiaUsjiaiBxl ^adftiSMdOttg- J]^oa,?i r^Ndthiogfat'iin^lbcMt tMHtttUfeV'^o^^^
word.— An officer was present during the whole time? YeSi^- • i'> "r>- v'^iUit -'^ *> "i ^^'^

Mtl jletem|^^»nn-a&^Wilt(y<Bitf Cordtdii]^ allffw lae^ t4i'i)Ut(lfaU'4«(f«tlbd ^4he
witness » he^ssyi hflifaa^tbtei?»»Hiniii«dion.behidf ^of 'the prwmrtloil, aad'lM^f6itSli
him whether he did not teHi Uw{ fittrdonerii^e attorney fbr (^intiseddfiOft/^^&ftO^a^S^
alK^it ^e Vn>s|4yrfi9^^||tf9ialr ^tt^^waborr, that he oonld reec^ect nothing -abonf^t?
Ij>#7^r,flpQl^'tq,|l^f«b<mit^ iHtindy^nd^aterataU; he did not ezamiiie-B^--^^'
yxw 1^0^ m?c(^^hai^ig^tlewan at^iednesford^ where Saunders lives, aftasaleP^I-ireBVisId:
t^ roo^^ I. wASt the^<rT4))d^y#u.pot tell that gentleman at Hednesftod tliai yoo' osiilA^
re^G^le^t pfo^tbipis Abou^ th^.bnupMdiy*aud- water at Shrewsbury ? No, I did QaS,'n4Ifad'3^o^:
apy qbnver^ationt/at ali, ftbout.it? I had with Mr. Stevens. — Was that gentlflsasn
p^esen^? Heiwas.7<-Di4younotsay in his presence that you covdd reeollect>oimB^'
about, the brandy^aadr-water at Shrewsbury ? I did not sa^ so.>^Were you n^t exaouB^
b'2^,iy(i;..C|:;^p apd Mr« Sweeting before the inquest, and did you not t^l them you bidw
n^ytbingiabouit/it? .No, I told nim what I knew about it; Mr. Crisp was one; tbe;oth«r
gentlemen X did; not know.T--You swear you did not tell them that you could r^cottset
nothing about it ? Yes, I do ; X told them what happened exactly as X teIL.you jbov*

Mr. JOHN SABGENT sworn.— Examined by Mr. Serjeant Shee.

'^'^' Ij1)elieve you live on your means; you are in no busines$t,or pirpfei^iqn?:. Jw^-B^*
-j-AVq you in tfee liabiti of attending races ? Yes : almost every public rape,^n,tfre .#€*«»»'
-^pfld yon know the late Mr. Cook ? Yes,,! did.— Intimately^ Yes, jjotmatdy^r'Aw
ap'p tJi^ prisoner pjjmer^ ^ Yes.— Did you la few days before, Mf* (Jook,>>ie[»th.r^?iv*
a^^ti^r from. bun? I received a letter from him.jduring,,tl*e Sh^rey^buyR raees,r-Ha4
yo^ ^ny ndticp to proauce that letter oq the jpart oif the,. CroVn? . iV^.^ial^we^^
t^jp part''9f ftie Crown to come here to ffiv^evidenee.— Have jjoi^baid^afly n9tiafl,|o jtfP*
d^ce^.t?iat jle.tfre^? J^o.^rfl^ave jfoi^go^ Uj'a>,)i^tjt|er? JL hav^ iiQ^.-^Bid yjoij, m^ipfk^^
for jfijsrhen ^ou heard your evidence might.be r^^^ired?! .1 fii^^ lise^fcted .f<?i: it, bat l
hfid,sehti it' to^iinJders th^ tpine5.r-Did.yo».m4ki? y^pphc^tiojj^.to Sai^ders for iif l^'
-T^p' it by 'letter ?yYe^^ * . - -« v„.

dia.-#-]ttave you li here r I have the letter S
for that letter ; this is it (producing the scone). — -Is that ai letter i

.'^W?/PMft^i(AW¥W3^^ <f .< '.

TAr, Serjeant Shee, — We hope to call him to-day. .!..,. -liv » <. i

Witnm^l-j(Q^^ilt^li!tlttii^tit'aitH^ tfycm whdi me to iead

Mr. Serjeant Snee. — My lordld<MS>not<thiokiydiliJ9iiglit'.t»fi%adit just nOi*^ j h«v«yo«
seen Saun^ji<|in^ Ui^^mi^'^M^.JAm'J^l^^ pewerto fiodtftat

letter ? TJiay^ ^(^ .>^T,¥»*MM^^ft4 %*^4ft^ ^^ ^m^^'^ to g^ <^ ^^^^•

MvifAtiorf^^/i^^i(iiqyMi:A^^^^ ^^hrMmmi yottr any. .otgeetio&<to Jet-me se«
th^t letter ?jj.;; i.^i-.d^/ *o«yi noi '..vl— .aoftviiio«-»i« j^i-. » ?'•-»•<' i '.' > •' ■ ' (•':••"

Mr. SeneanAJSSaeA^uHabihtiVueitPf^ (i^th9mittfmymUj6t^teiViitoSflkilieif'fo^ ^^
a copy of that letter ? I have not a copy of that^fitttersrhbidi-JdDonr Ihe « eentents'^ of ' the
letter word by word. < >/^ » . '-,

'' '^:S^ikhtlSKe^;-^X>(^fyh^t Xiodblitp tow thin^ t mxj $A what the oontents are ;
irSaundefs we^ here I shoum call hin^ first^imt Xe is not .^^w »t iMresent ?

i M]^« JLttofTiejji'Qp^ljr-l am afraid l^-^aaot allow this ; it U iwry loofe indeed.
. ^ ildf. f9ff^«t|i^]i^w^D0ef yow.LoH^if think il cwmot^Teiiehred?
' Lox4<2iJBapabLii.f*^We«iiiolcaot. •'
Mr: BiirfeMtSfke^i-^PeAattk y<)tir LovdA^pwilt a&ow tu> if Mr. Saunders should come.

te l^frcali^i^ wknai^F

: Mr. Baron ALi>KB80N.--Certain]ly; is not, this the proper time to call Mr. Saunders
upon his subpoMia? '^ ''^^ '^ ^ ' ^ "' ^'^

Mwi AryAKt(BA99jt=f^ w^ii*«slegtd^lMdttiiitMfliw^ iiid 1i^ awr«« fc«r« later in the day,
my MLnnii ^ (in>dl^ m<fiw ) ^DaifWilcniMr ilf >fOfdr o^ns Mnto^^dge, T>r fiwn anything that
haStpMsad^bdhraMlPaimtr aa*>eoik4i!t ^^wr i^t89ti«,«Wliiit th«$y irott «r lest at Shvews- '
hi^vyr^ i) No^i fird«i»t'iit IttiMirabtttv ;v [(^ly U(>1lcwha«K!)ii6k fdi^ me in the letter that
heiiraiDta.-4»^hcviN tMftnv^'Mtv Oohts deatti'^bMlfyod ni^opijbndaity i»f noticing the state
of his throat ? I had.— Tell us when that was and where.'^aMit H^t'oobnyred to call your
attenMomt^ t|iSrna«a>ofihisith9Mit ?n iVasitfttfeihiiti fttKivAyaoLan the mek previous to
t]Na dlir«ifibat7iMe^ilM9( ..we>Glepl' iaadjoiniiigi Ix^ifiM fa:taGh{otfc0:^iani in tlia tnoming
l«»qaJMtin|f ajlMiitt(m'tD«thostate:of his thfoatandiaouih; andthe^ackipatt^ his tongue
was in a complete state of ulcer* >' • • • ^», -.u :.\n.;* i-^ ', ^-t.- t» .,

^iJjQtA QAmmuUr**-H9 ask^ yoa td look atih?) He<did| 7 was iivtbe rsoni, and the
1]!ack ^his.thrau wss ^rary much inflamed'; the u^ulaiiwasswviifed^iand iamd 1 was snr-
priM4 that he isottldaaianddrisdc in tbe'stata hiamiantb wM iii; ' '< 1

. Mr. iS«r;swrtiSBtoe.^Toa8aidthattahnn? IHes.^^l^lfAiO'h^Bky'to^tftaf? He said
hk&'tiad been fa&> that state Ibr weeks and montiis, and fldir h^'did iM>t'«ttke\notSofe of it—
thsA was at the time he was speaking— now, be said, I do not takef tt«tke of iv, I hare
hisd. it for iresMs and months.— Is that all that passed oh that ofceasion lietwe^ii you ? On
the sore'ihraat.-*^&ad you at any time, and if so, when, an opportunity <^ olnservrng the
inconveniende whieh he actually suffered in taking anything diat was at ^ hot? ' i had
ir»q[nently f I met him before when his throat was in this state, and he had siipwil !t to
nie pserioasly to that.^When previously ? Almost at every meeting that We atte^ed.
■^Did he at any time on any of those occasions tell you of anything that had put him to
great pain in dbte attempt at eating and swallowing? The only ocdbion wlien I'Sdw It
itas Vf his taking a gingerbread nut on the platform. — ^When was that? On the platform
at LiT«i^io^ after the race; he took a ginger-nut with cayenne.

Mr, Mtomey-Qeneral, — ^With cayenne in it ? Yes. • .' i..r -•/

Mr. Serjeant Shee. — Do you know that he did it, or did he say he did it ? I saw hipOrdo
it; he took it by mistake.-^What happened ? It happened that he told me f^fl^rwardk d^at
it very nearly killed hljn.-^Did he say more particuhirly than that what efffect'U produced
upon nikn ? fie did not : he saSd it nearly killed him.;— Had you tiie means Of Kiiowing
at Liverpool "Hiethei'Mr. Cbok had the command of money, or whetiiet h^ was in want
of mon^?^ Hfe'was vety {>obr.— -ThAt was the wieek' before the Slf^wcbunrBaces? It
was. — ^whAt' metkA had y6u of k^bwihg thit ? He owed me 2df., and hie 'g^ye ^ne lOL
on' account, attd he said he had' not s^tflSti^^t to p^y hik expenses at I^vc^^obl,. t>ttt that/
I should hare the lialahce of XSK at the Shr^wi^ry Meeting.-^Had you the m^an^.oif J
knowing whether Mr. (Jook and Palnler were in the Mbit of putlin|; on ror each qthef-^'j
that is, bet ting for eacK o^er on particuhir horses? Yes, they were, and fHey did at th^'
Liverpool Meeting.— Have Vdu tfie mfeatiS of knowing v^etUca- Mn Cook lost' money at,
Liverpool, and to whom_h^,lb«f|;?'y' ;'•;'•";• . • ,/V -V •"' f- ' ^' •''!'•'»

Mr. Mtomey'Geifieral,^i>id. youhe^ for him? '^tpxecuted a commission lor Mr. Palmar';
I put the money on ; Mr. Palmer told' mfe"diat^M>. Cook :itW)d ti'-tioMdd ^bf ttifiA'incmey,
which was at Liverpool. ,/. •.. t ^t .^ ■ • m „ •• » v •..> \o .^t,^. ,,

Mr. J<«9ra€|^G^rQ7.*-HWhstlwwih«<aih6ttnt<tfit<? * t'^

Mr. Serjeant Shee, — I asked him if he had the means of knowing^, and I thlbk he
aasw^red&aihe knew.thec-coatsniaf'puSti^gionfbetweni'ilbem /T^ > ^ w \^ '

Mr. Babor AiipSiunN.-^idtter l)%iied'>foi' C^K, M^^Co<At belted fdit Paling:
Mr. Serjeant -Shee.-^mLA yiu Itn'OlHi'iif iriy 'dfce; shbkly "before "^Mr. Cook*s death,
of his having used a lotioo' called UaekS-washf Thave'hwdlkikappiy to Mr. PaJmer
to supply him with a wash of that description. — ^Do you know whether that Is amer-
ciurial lotion ? X do not»«-I think rwe ma^ say' that R'iftai raerouHal lo^Ti,

Mr. 7i»ne9.'M)f calomel and limc^^water. ^ ' ' '- '

Cross-examined by Mr. James,
When was that ? When he applied for it, it was at the Warwick meeting.

8

^70 TlOiOi Off WULXJOI FMXBM.

Mr. Serjsgnt 8ke0»r-*BtiA ytm eiref mo^ ftecntiji beforeMr. C<»k^ deaA, lAs ti»oi(t
dressed bj aaybodj ? I n^eYer did* to my knopvled^e, « -

Mr. Jamee, — ^Tfasl blsdi-wash^ w I VBderstand, was not to.bednmk? K<Oi I ibovHi
think not ; it wag a Io4ioii«**-Wlien was tbat ? It was at the Warwick meeting.— Wien ?
I cannot infbnn yon tlie date.-^What time of the year was it ? There are two Warvick
meetings; I cannot state positively' the date.-^Was it in the Spring? It was at the
time that his mai« Polestar tsb. — Tift spring of 1855? The spring of 1956, I should
say. — ^Was it in last year, or the year befbre ; try and remember ? It was hist year,
1855, tiie latter and ; the meetiflg' alter tiw Newiharkfet lii^eiiBg.-*Was he^st Kewmaitet ?
Yes, Mr. Cook was ; he lived in the same honse with me : the NewnMcAet Meeting
was before the Warwick Me«tiii|g^«^Wa8 ' he at tkt antaidftiiBi Moes, and nearly i^ the
iraoes of last year 2 Tes ;. he mm njt lh« OsArowitch «ttd the Cambridgeshire.— Nearly
* all the face mcetags 9 He w«s.-^When was lk& Lxverpool Meeiing, when he showed
you his throat : a week before the Sbrtfwibory ? Yes.-^Ye« weve snrpnaed at his eating
and drinking so well ; did he to* andndHnk w^ ? Yes^ MS' appetite wia ipMtty good;
that was what soq^rised me at Xireippol, and at the eithev meeikipgs aa weU^llus cay-
enne pepper-ant, is that a nut that is mad«u|i for a sort ef tcieh, and sold with othos
without it ? It is the case. — Is it soid for a sort of triok.? Yes y pezhaps^ eae «e two
are put in a paxc^ and whoeTec geta them, gels his tiuraat bwmt.<^Yoa did not est
them? No, I did not. — ^Hegot one of them? Yes. — ^Have y«u eres tasted one? Yei^
I have. — ^Aretheypiettystroipig? Some are stronger than othei& — With the cayenne?
They haye the taste of th& cajye^oe veiry strong,

Mr. Serjeamt Skee^*-! aak iw the letter of the 4di of Janaary^ 1855, ham Mr. Cook to
Mr. Palmer f Mi; Hutmi haa it* I' believe.

Mr. JBRBMIAH ^MFPH sworn.— Examined by Mr. aerjamt Shee,

You are an attorney at Rugeley ? Yes, I am. — You are acquainted with the prisoner,
and also were acquaxorted with the late Mr. Cook ? Yes. — Did you see Mr. Cook at the
Talbot Arms on the 16th of NoTember, the Friday? Yes, I did. — Where did you see
him ; what time in the moming, and where ? In his bed*room. — What time in the
morning ? About 10. — ^Were you present at his breakfost? I was. — ^Did he breakfest in
bed? A tray was put on the bed, a small tray.

Lord Caupbell. — He was' in bed ? Yes, he was. — ^What did he take for breakfast ?
A cup of tea. — ^Anything in it? A wine-glass of brandy was brought in. — ^Was it put in
his tea ? Yes, in one cup of tea.^-Which he drank ? Yes.

Mr. Serjeant Shee. — Did you dine in his company at Mr. Palmer's ? I did. — ^Had yon
■seen him in the interval between breakfast and dinner ? I am not quite positive.— What
had yeu for dinner ? We had a rump-steak.

Mr. Babon Alderson. — This was on the 16th?
, Mr^ Serjeant Skee, — Yes ; Friday, the Wth. \

We had some champagne to drink with it, and seme pott wine after dinner.r-lMd
Mr. Cook drink fieely or in aaoderation 7 The same as we (fid. — ^Was it freely or in
. joifldesation ? - We had three bottlea, aad he drank hit i^iave.

Mr. Babdk Atj>ERsoN. — ^You drank three boHtles? Yes. — ^How many of yon? We
had either two of champagne and one of port, or two of port and one of champagne.

Mr. Serjeant Shee, — How many were there ? Mr. Cook, jnyself, and Mr. Palmer.-^
Wlien was dinner over ? I should think about half-past 2, the dinner. — When did yon
rise from table and leave the house ? We left the house, I should think, towards 6 in
the evening ; Mr. Palmer said he would go and write "his letters.

.^ Lord Campbell. — When did you rise from table ? I should think from about 5 to 6*
Mr. Serjmnt Shee, — ^Did you and Mr. Cook leave the house together ? We did.—
Where did you go together ? We went to m^ house, and from there to the Alhion
hotel, which is next door. — ^Did you have anything to drink there ? We had a glsss of
brandy-and-water, cold, each. — Did Mr. Cook leave you there, or did you go away wi*"
him ? He left me there. — ^Do you remember anything that he said before he went sway
as to the way he felt ? He said he felt cold.— Did. he say anything more abeot feeUng
cold? He said he* felt cold, an4 he put his feet on the fender and warmed ^"JJJ* *
little ; and he borrowed a book, and he said he would go home and read it in bed.—
What time did he leave the Albion ? , I should think from 7 to 8 ; I cannot say ]?r«-
cisely. — Had you at any time 9n that day any conversation with Mr. Cook on the sjhject
of the money due to you, that conversation being in the presence of the prisoner? Yes ;
in the afternoon of the Friday, after dinner, we were talking about racing and money .-^
What passed? I asked Mr. Cook ttfs money, and he gave me 5^. then.— What did yoi^

a9kbSm.&r.?f 5tf.Iaaked h&ibforf k^ nrve aw S/yiheii? and^faea be took the note
out of his case I said, *' Yoa can pay m» iim>mha\B SOi f be siaM, «' No ^ ^ i«kid, '• Cook,
you can pay mevall;" heaaid,' " No» there 4b only 4U» 100*^a to yea f then he said he
had giyen Mr. Palmav cawey, and he i^uld -pay ne tho^ veaeaiiMler when he temnied
from. Tatters^'s on Mondsiyr alter the tettling»r-«-Diid anythnig atore ooetur about thd
xnoDQ^ ; did he give yoa aay jeasoa,ii3hy hei <eouUi not grae yon atsy mstn ? He wA htf
had giYon Mr. Palmer monefy. — On. the i»i^t (the Saturday nig^t) fbUenHsgy irbere dM
you bleqp? I vent to beAv ^^ Yaa fnoit welly and* V sla^ ia hiyfriooM^ adontala-bedded
room. — What Ume did y.oa.retira,tQ hed.^* ,U waa late »4m» we latitedaa bad ; I ahauld
think 12 o'clock.; there had beeoi a concert in the house, which made k |aier ; kwatf
close to the bedroom.~rDui»^ft th^ ntfht^id. anjrthingjtoppm ; was he unwell? bi the
early part of the ni^ht he was unwen.^a what way unwell ? He got tome toast-aaii*
water ; he was washing his mouth, aad hie was ^iok ; a night-thair lyas in the rooai, at
a short distance before the fire, and I^saw him therctt

Lord Ci3[PBSix.-*-Did you see him use it? > I didaotte^ at least

Mr. Serj643mi SbM^-^iyiA- he Aiy anything ftam which y6n eould hii^f what the con-
dition of his bowela was? what do yoti meaar by sayirig ha waa sick ; did he vomxt?
He' tried to do eo; I do not know whetbier he did oi' not ; I *vas in bed, and I did not ge€
out of bed.*^Did anytlmig paftieolair oK^ear daring ttiat ui^t beyond what von have told
us ? About 2 o'clock I went to sleep ; I had been out shooting ; the tacm^ had ceased itf
the inn^ and I went off to sleep, and I slept until Mr. P^mer and Mr. Bunfofd came in
in the morning to see him ; and 1 lay still in the bed, and I heard a conyersation between
the doctors and Mr. Cook ; the convetsation was to this efi^et — ^' Well, Mr. Geok, how
are you this morning ?" Mr. Bamford said : he said, *' I am raiber better this momui^ S
I slept from about 2 or 3 o'clock, after the confounded concert waa g|(|n%.a£ker ^e hoiiia
had become quiet ;" and he said, ^ I will send you some more medicuie."

Lord Cambpell. — Mr. Bamford said that ? Tea \ I .do not raooUaot ahy fiisther eoai*
versation : I got up and left the house*

Mr. Serjeant Sh$e, — You knoar Mns. Pahoaerydtha mathcr o€ tha pnainar? ■ Ye8.--^ia
eonseq,uence of something that paawd between you and her, did yaa^ iwike eftvmngisi
Monday, go to the prisoner's house to aee if he waa thmre; if ha had mtanied? Mffll
Palmer sent me a message to come up, she wanted to see me« — ^Yoja went i»Mw, Falnar's ?
I did. — ^Tou saw her, 1 suppose ? Yes. — In consequence of what passed between toq bmA
her did you go to look for the prisoner and see if he had arrived? I did.-^Whaft time
\ras that ? I shotUd think about 9. — Could you find him at that hour ? I conld not.**
Did yofi see him later that evening, and when for the first time after that was it| waa it
S o'clock? As near as I can recollect, 10 minutes past XO. — ^Where was he when you sair
him ? He came from the direction of Stafford in a car. — Did you go with him anywhere ?
I went with him t he said ** Have you seen Mr. Cook to-day ? I said ** No, X have beea
to Lichfield on buainess." He sud ** We had better just run up and see.'' — ^Was thHt
before he went into his own house? Yes.-rYou say you saw him in a ^ ? Yea ; he
said " Before you go down to mother ;* it will be too late."— Did you go up* to Mr. Cooing
room together ? We did.— Did you hear what passed between Mr- Cook and Mr. Palmai:?
Mr. Cook said to Mr. Palmer,'* You are late, Doctor, to-night ^ I did not expeat you to
look in.*'^ — What else passed? He said, " 1 haye taken the medicine, you beinp late j.J
have talsen the medicine." He left and did not stay more than two or ^ree numutes : I
think h«e- did ask me why 1 had* not called in earlier, and I told him I had bee^^t
Liehfielci On btrsine^. — Did he describe in any way the medicine he ha^ tals^en ? 9e
sedd that Mr. Bamford had sent him some pills, and he had takei;i them, and Palmer was
late ; intimatiafg that he should not have taken them if he had thought Palmer would have
aalted inr bafoce.^-^Were' any inquiiiea aMde of him by Palmer when he went int6 the
room, of the natave that a medksai naa mahea of hia patient ; did he ^1 his pulse? '

Mr. .4**ortMy.fl»«wra;.— What dSd he db, and what did he sriy ?

Mr. Serfeant iS^e.— Wliat inquiries were ma^e ? I forget j I recollect Mr. Cook telling
Mr. Palmer that he had been tip to Ashmole and Saunders. Mr. Coolc said, " I have been
up, Doctor, to-day ;" and Mr. Falmer sa^, ** You ought not to have been up."— Is that aU
that passed? I do not recollect any other. — Did you leaye the room aloufs, or with
Palmer? We both went straight fi-om' there to his mother's,— How far is Mrs. Palmer's

William.

Mr, Attomey-GFeneraL^^eyeT nund what you said.

s 2

Mt. Serjeant Sfufe.^-iM y(m' !tei'*^;jiiij' i^ft^htoent 'the^b^'^'T idik^''ito'V<J*^*g8k^
fi4iior.^~-Toa'did not ^t It ? -No j he said tlre^ was ndne up 6tifof Ae cieliiW-^YitLV^iit'
away without it ? Tes ; it was col* atsA la November:— YcKtf left tfce 'hottsb * met ' th^ ?
I did.— Did you leave Palmer in tihe faxmse?' i left^Mr/ Palilu^ in faU house; and *^ent
luMne.-^Did yoa at any time ordei^ iaDythiiig''to*be mAde for him "at the A^ioH, for Mr.
Godk ? Not thai iught.»--'At any time ? - Yesc-^^VUbebf xThe'iMKi'day I invfeed Mr. Cbok
• Iodine with me» . , - n m- ji <• M' m i i :, i ■.'•*- w ■ •

Mr. JlM0rfK^(?tffu?ra?>**On the^Saftutdayf > Tee^* <I^#il6 ^^^ tmek't^'ilih^l'^id^y, after
Idioed with Mr. P^liae^^. l^iOsU M^.€bok'ttii^W/Phlfli^<1(^'«tt^''^A &e 6n tlie
Saturday ibUowing. ' ' ' vol i

Mr. i8fer;Von< S»^#.^I Wtflwl hei*i nbtdlfae-Mth f<Ai7' .No; lie dift nbt* Mr. Cook
sent me a message about between 13 and 1, t^&l<bf waaBQt v^l, ^nd he thought that he
should not leare his room^ an4 ie -^id, npt.diue yi\tl^ me- — Did. you ond^.ajpQfihmg.for
him at the Albion ? X got a boiled , I^ of, mutton, apd 1 sent som^ of the l9oth) aiwl it
went from the Albiou, by a charwoman^ in a jug. — ^It was taken away by a Oh«rwomaii;
do you remember her name? iRowley; J think Ana ^wley.— Did yon, at-aqy'tiBMs,'
shortly before Mr. Cook's deat)x, \»rrQw money, for him from anybody? I bono wed 21)0/^
and negotiated a loan from Pratt of/500/. — ^How long before bis d^th was that; in/H'a.yr
and August ? — ^I haye given the evideupe to the Clerk for the prosecution ; I have been:
subjKBuaed on the part of the prosecution.

Mr. Attomey'^Generah-^They are the same amouitts ; they are already in evidence..

Mr. Serjecmi 8kee.^^The 200/. was in May, was it; or when was it ; in MaV, 185^? I
lOn. almost ppsitiTe it was, because I think it was at the Shrewsbury races. — I^dyou bor-*
row any other sum of 200/1 fbr Mr. Cook ? I do not now recollect ; I negociated two
KOttBS timt I know* of; the aoo/.Tind the 500/., were negociated through Mr. Pratt^Di^
ycfu in additien to that 20Q/., witibin a month or two b^ore.his death, borrow moh^ for
hut ? did you bonrow any for him of Mrs. Palmer? I borrowed 100/. ttom Mrs. P^mec
and lOOl. from Mr. William Palmer, to make up the 200/. ; I do not recollect siuy other
aOO/. ^ I might have done.-*Do yon know of your own knowledge whether Pahner and
Mt. Cook were jointly interested in any horses ? I only know that they iret« inteteste^
m. one ^ i told &e solieitor lor the prosecution the same.

' ' Mr. MorTtep^Gerierah — Never mind what you told the solicitor for the, prosecution. I
icaow they were in one — ^Pyrrhine.

'- 'iS^, Serjeant Shee, — ^Do you know Whether they were in the habit of betjdngjfor.eacb
Other ? Very frequently ; when Palmer's horses were going to run, Mr, Cook woul4
^k Palmer to allow him to put money on because he thought he would g^t l^ttec
odds ; and, when Mr. Cook's horses were going to run, I^almer wpuld ask filsi Cook.-^
ts that what you mean, that they put on for each other? Yes.— IJ|o you know of that
having been done once or frequently ? Frequently. — Had you any oppfitunity of observ*
Ihg, shortly before Mr. Cook's death, and if so,, when, what the st^fe of His throat was?
I had' seenMr. p£dmer*s assistant, Thirlby, dress it with caustic.— ; When?. Four or .five
'dtoies.-j-How long before his death ; was it before or after the Shrewsbury jax^s ? I am
libt quite positive whether before or lifter the Stirewsbury races I,iiaa seen him dress his
ihroat ; I cannot say exactly the tlnies, I think it was chiefly tefore the race8.-7-Have you
^y genuine signature of Mr. Cook's that you knoy to beliis handwriting having seen
him write it ? Yes [some papers were handed io Mr. '^ericant SheG\ ; tbey are two notes I
deceived from him ; mstructions for the SoO/.?— There is one signe4 ." Jt P;. Cook," ani
^e other ** J. Parsons Cook ;" did you see tha,t ^^ed ? . Yes, J saw that signed.

' ' jLord CAJtfPBELL^-rHow many J^re ,therej? , . 'jpvOi npfiis and a me^oinindiWL
,. Mr. S^fjeani,ghee,-^^t>a -. you tkujow. of any piwicew/ having been asrved upbn Mr. • Cook
8hor4y.l^&Nre his deatJa^ Bad wtm •y'^ifltje^fiKtiwMhin ap^esk or two, or tiuree,' were you
Wffr present when A wni wad.fi«EV<ed HfrnJ^m^?.. -^S^J (iraflr Uot>prM0Bt;. hewaa ssrved
Hrlth.a writi— rDid. y/o«,knpw^ ,that(fi»at him^ d»i ^e give yioa any instruetkins as to tha
irnii sboiftly-b^oire ]ii8 dea^r^q enUv<»»>9^9rwo»S r I cwutuQt say that,

*'Mj de«* Sir, I havfs been ^n %49vii pf,a fii^.^b'of^t the biU, but have at last settled it
at a cost of au' extras three guixiea^; , t^ tbe M^JAu^ , 4iseounter had issued a writ against
Ihie, and lam very much disgustedat ^t," (Sigmed) ** John Parsons."

Lord CAXPBSix.-«-nPid you ' destroy the envelope in which that letter wba eoav«yed f
I did; ttiey were both addreised'to me.' [Another Hiter wcisTead dated 25itk ofJuney 1S5&.}

« Dear Jimmy— I should like to have the bill renewed fbr two months Hfitnte ; can it
he done, let me know by fetum ; 4, TictOriA IStreet, Holborn Bt!dge. t hflve scratched

Pq}e8tiir.:lbr the ^orthiimptoQvhir? .ml' Wjalverj^Amotov Stakes ;> I shall be down'on FH-
4»y wa f^turday* ,Xn Jiaste— J. Paisoms Cook, Atd teUs ma, BoUon « Arabaa wift

via the NortlHunl^riaad plate. (Signed) J. P* Cook."

Mr. Serjeitni 3h4e',nr-J>id. yoa <M7* that you aalr Ihat wiitten, ^'J. P. Oook?" X
diiU [rA«5wi/«rMi8? paper to«Mfr«aA) ** Polettar^Syw; Siriiia^ S yn,hj way of mott*'
gage, to fi^we ^OOi.^ advanced ion %hiXl'o£ esKOhan^, dated ^tk Angntt, 1865, payable
three months after date." Witness, — ^Those were the instructions to prepare the mortgagiL

Mr. BiiBqN. Aui^«#g^.r^What is ithia»r Oaee of. Mr. J. Fiaher" ? The aasirer te the
letter was to ^ diEf)^d<i|o Mr^ J'ish^r'a >i«aoa Sof Jdi. fGook.-^Wm it ? I hare bo doiM
it was ; I have no copy. . * '

Mr. ^V«»^ 3^.-<*<:;axryo« t^ afttke dlite?:^ !)»▼« keptine ec^y.
- . .♦ ^ C«wj-exambifedl)f Mr.^ft)n^-(?«fef^

I waikt IXMidteiifSfy you, i'tl cazi, as tliere are two Mr. ^iths : are yon the ffentlemaa
thdt took Myatt \o Staffwil Gaol, and "was there two hours f "^^KJ was.— Have you
kso^wn th© Palmer^ \6hs? Yes. — ^And very Jntimatejy?' Yes.— ^nave von been em-
ployed a g60ddeal as- the'attoniey for Palniet? Mr. Tahner and his ftmily.— Some
mseinlyers of Mb Ifamily ; I asked you about Paliper;' you havie been emplbyed as an attorney
ft>r 'Palmer? Yes.-^A good deal, have yoii not? Ves, a. good deai.-rDid he apply to
yon in De^etaober, 1954, to attest a proposal on the life of Ms brother Walter for 13,000/.
at the Solicitors' and General Office ? Yes, I am told' there is such a ilung. — Did he apply
to you to attest sach a document ? I cannot reeoUeet ; if I saw the document I eouldsay
whether it was my handwriting.— Cannot yoo. YeoolkoC ? It ia So long since ; if I saw
any document with m^name to it, I could reoogniae it iastaBtly.-**4a Jannary, 1660, wUI.
you swear that >x>u did not do so ? I am on my oath, and I swear, to the best of my
belief, I do not recollect. — You will not swear you were not applied to fbr that pnrpose?-
Ko^ uor that I was ; if I could see the document I oould recognise it immediately. — Inr
January, 1855, were you applied to by Palmer to attest a proposal for ISfiOOL to tb»
Prince of Wales Office on his brother Walter's life ? I do not recolleot ^bat either*— «.
13,000/. was a large sum for Walter Palmer, was it not? Yes.r-Walter Palmer waa a.
man of nothing ; he had not a shilling in the world ? I do not know. — ^You dor; yoo wen£
concerned for the &mily ? I know uiat Walter Palmer had money, because he .lived in«i
dependent, out of business. — ^Do not you know that he was then in great distresi^'.and
that he was at that time an uncertificated bankrupt ? I do not know that. — ^Do you. kaowi
that he was a bankrupt ? He had been.— How long before ? Six years before.--You say
Walter Palmer had been a bankrupt six years before ? At least that.— Had he ever don^
anythllig for hhnself since ? No j he had been in no business. — Do not you knoTf hej
was at that .time living upon an allowance of U. per week from his mother? I cannot
tell th« allowance ; I never heard* what it was. — ^Do not youknon^ that he was living upoW
an allowance from his mother ? I know that he had an allowance ; I do' not know fbat
he had anything from any .other source; I think his brother WlUiavft gave him t^onejf
at different times.-rYou know all the fieimily afiairs; he had an allowanpe i^om hi^
mother ? No, I do not say th^t he had an allo^srance trom his mdther ; I beHeVie he hadC
— Where, in Ae course^of 1854 or 1855, were you living; in Kugeley ? In 1854 J think;
I resided partly with WiUi^m. Palmer;, ^om^times 1 was at Jxis, mother^s. — ^Did you ^eea
at his mother's? Sometimes.'— When you slept at the ijiotheij's, where did you sleepT
Jn a room.— Was it in hers? No,— 1 aJik yon,, upon your bath, whether yo|i w^re' nojj
intimate with ^c^; you know what I nj^nf X ^^ ^^^y ^^ more intimat^ with her thiu);.
the proper intimacy that ou^ht to exis:t,-r-How oft6n were you in. the haWt of.sleemng at
her house, having yoUr own place of residence in Bugeley ? Frequently I slept '^nere ; I
cannot say the number of timte,' Wit fyequently.— ''Two or thrte'lhncsal wefek? Yek, I
should say I did.— Having your own fitoeec «f libode livRugftley ? Yea.'— Ai'e-jieu a
single or a married man ? Suwtor^H^w Umg did 'this habit aed fVaolioo^f 'id^j^iiilf twb
tr three times a wedc at Mn. Pklm^s ooaliiMe?. :Sefveral y«ars.-«^Ilad you iyoiar ow»
lo^^gs at Rageleyat the tiaie? Ye«» tey own chambemat'Rngeiey.afciae time; Ihad
chambers in Rugetey ; led«ings.>-^Ydur:'0Wtfb^o06ij loippoW? ^«^> i faaii abeoroonx;
— ;How fer is your house from Mrs. Palmer's ? I shpuld say it is nearly a quarter of a^
mile. — ^Will you be so good as to explain how it happened, that having your own plaoe
of abode and your own bedroom, that foF^sev^erAl yfeate '^on* slept- Wo or tSir^ tSines a
week in Mrs. Palmer's housd? SoMettttfeS ioWW df th^ Ai6ttlbers"6f the flifliily "nsed te
come and visit her; her soris.-^Which'sbtis^ere tai^Set'^^J^ephjJ^Where doerfhe livef
He has latterly resided at UverpaoL^Sinoe wiiibn? i Should: tWnk two yea«.-^Where
did he live belbre ? At a place seven mileS'fiFdm Rugetey •; -^i^ ke wvnt to a plaoe called^
I think, Worley,.abo\it eleven, miles off* — ^What o^or son u^io come and visit Mrs.
Pahn«r ? Waltier.— Where. did he live?. .Sc^aetimes he Uve4 at Stafford, and sometime

SM TBtASL W Yi9LLlAU MtltXR.

lie TO M LW^rpooLr^Did' U lh« Urtteidr ftt Rttgietoy t 1«otiMai|^'-^(6eetb^V'^^im^
tfro or <lir«e weekfu^Whem 4id ke <fie, Wattdr PidBier ? At 8tefllBrd, Pliffli^ ; I iras
not present at the time ; I understood Ic^^lt vm loo fkr, I- intppMe, ^hen yon ^rent
tp see the members of the fimoly, to dine or driak tea, to return a ^naiter of a mile? I
used to stop and kave a {^lasB or two of gin and irater, and pla^r At eerdt.

Lord Caupbblx^ — ^Yoa went to the mother's ib see thebi ? " Y^j*.

The Attomey-Generai. — ^But you did not sleep at the mother's to see them; how was
it that you did not go home ? 1 had' no partieuiar reason why I dii4 not, — ^Whgr did yon
jBOt ? I used to have some gin and water and smoke, and if it was late they used to say,
** You had better stop all nighj." — ;Did this go on three times a week for several years ?
Yes ; but I used to stop ther^ frequently when there was AO one theprc^. neither the
mother, nor the sous, nor any onie : ttey used to go ^o Buckstone for a month in the
summer. — I will not trouble you about t^e time t;hey were at Bucks^ae;. you. said you
were there two or three times a week for several years ; I am talking to you of the tinws
when Mrs. Palmer was there; did ^ou never sleep there except when some of the soos
were there? Yes, I have. — ^When the sons .were not there? Yes, — And when the
mother was ? Yes, certainly I hav6.-pHow often did that happen ? I could npt state the
number of times ; two or three times a week j sometime^ I never went in /or a week, or
a month I have been away,— iFroni Rugetey or from the house ? From the house. — Then
lor two or three nights in the "week you would go there when there was nobody there
but the lady? Swnc nights. — What did you stop there for on those nights ? T^ere vas
ike mother, trad Wie daughter, and the Bei*vants.— ^You could have gone home on those
nights ? So I could, but I did not; I could not say that I did when 1 did not. — Having
•tated all that, do you mean to say before this jury that there was nothing but a proper
i^timacT between you and Mrs. Pahner ? I do. — Attend ; I have called your atten-
^on to two of thes« proposals ; were you called upon to attest another proposal in the
Universal Office for lS,0()d/. upon the life of Walter Palmer ? I do not recollect that I
was, but if I could see any letter, or my name written to it, I could say.^~-Give me m
answer first ? I oannot say.— I ask you, as an attomej, this : do you mean to say that
you cannot give me an answer whether you were applied to by. William Palmier to attest
a proposal for an insurance upon his brother's life more than once for 18,000^. ? I do
jQDt recollect it, but if I could see any document or any letter to remind me of the drcum-
stance I would not deny it.

Lord CampjjexXv — W^rjg you ever called upon to witness a proposal for an insurance
wpon Walter Palmer's life for 13,000/. ? I do not recollect that

Mr. jittomey.-QeneraL--^J)o you remember getting a 5/, note. for attetting an asskn-
in^t by Walter Palmer to his brother of such a policy ? Most Ji^tely I mi^t.— Did
you? I do not recollect it 5 I might have received some rnqney^r— Did yon attest such
^ 46signi)[ient ? ](f I had my book« here--'^ . 1 ' /

• IiQrdiC4MP9«u;>.Tr-Were ywu called upon to attest the ««iignment pi a faHkj ^J
IVilUw Painter to to hrothi^r ? I do not r«<^eot it niyw.
." MTtiAtt»rneifFQen0rai^»*-l will «ndeAvoaY ^to bring it to yoUr Moodectioii $ say whether

' Aat'is yottt ngmitnr* (a p<iper being kande4 to tiW witnd^) i do not you know your ovm

: fkMtulwf It ia very timUav to Boly «igBatiire.<>^Have you tke slightest doubt in the
Tk^ridi upon yonr oatk tiutltthat is your signature ? 1 have asM« little doubt about it.—
BtpuLtfaali instmaMsit and say vhstiier upon |f our solemn oath that is not your signature ?

< IikiM^eisomn-dionbt tba^it as'not my ;h]tndwritlflgt*tt<Keep iit in yesir hand ; have yon read
through the document ? No^.I have npt/r^Tb^n ,do «o ; w|U9 t^t prepared in yosr office
<^,not?. ItjWSB i^ot,-— Save you ever seen it before? It i^ very similar to my hand-
writing J it' is very much like my handwriting. — I* will have an answer upon your oath

' one way or the other, is that not your handwriting?

.^^|^^^??jr^-Do 70^ *^Ji ^t.^» yo^l h^^ritp^t I think it is not my

sweaTf-^Will
Eugeley " is not

^ ^ ^ . tay doubts that it is not my hand'

wrhing. — lyo not you Know yoifi* oim h^dwHtlng' when you see it ? I do.

I(Ord pAM?nBij*.'r:^ou h^y^ md, *f I sw^r it is not; my handwriting?" I think it if
a yery good imitation of my own handwiitihg.-^You swear that it is not your own band-
frriting? I bpli^ye i^ is not.

Mr» Bab^m AhDSaiou. — Did you ^ver make such an attestation f
Mr. Aktomey'Generai.^ — Look at the signature of Waiter Palmer, and say whether that
ii Walter Palmer's signatsre ? I believe that to be Walter Pahaaer's signature.— Look at

^ 4^ttia^Nio% '^ %»ed« s««kd, and dtliroted^^ » that in Ut. Pratt*! bMidimtiBg?^-
yes^-~AD!i4,ir9icMnot ivcoi^e that ^roxn Mr. I^tt, up^n yoqr ^nfeh ? Most Ukely I mi^t/-^
t>id you? I cfuonot mww^ tbftt.-^WiU yoa swear you did not, or have yoa any doubt of
the fact? I ihmk it ia very likehr it ought hftve beea a^irt to Walter Palmer. — ^Did yo«
not reodve it ^m Mr. Pratt? X think Mr«*PaUiier gaxre it t04iie.*-Did Palmer give it to
you ? I believe he did^T-Did he ? I da jxq$. r^ooUept.— Did William Palmer give you that,
or not ? I have heard talk oif this document, and I have asked to see it many times. — Did
Williftm Palmer give it to you? Most likely he did.— l^d he ? It was not signed at the
time. — Did he give you that documeijt ? Yes, h? did ; I have no doubt he did.-^If that
be the document -ifhidh he ^ve you, bearing Walter Palmer's signature and the writing
of Mf. Pratt, which you' say is his — ^upon your oath, is not that your attestation? I tell
you, I believe it not to b$'so,-^Did you receive I2iat' document fh)m William Palmer? I
believe I had it. — Upon your oath, is it not your handwriting ? I believe it not to be. —
Will you swear it is not ? I believe it i^^ not — Look at it agam ? I remember it by the
manner in which it is folded ; I carried it out shooting, and f had a powder-flask. — ^Did
you apply to the Midland Counties Insurance OMce to be smpointed their agent at
feugeley? I did.— When was that; in Octdber^.isss? 1 should like to fetch all the
documents and papers. — Did ,you apply to the Midland Cou^ities Office to be appointed
their' agent in October, 18^5? ' I did apply to them.— Did you send them a proposal for
10,000/. upon the life of Bates? I did.

Mr. Serjeant S/iee, — That must be in writiAg ? Y^, I^recollect it very well
Mr. Attorney-General.-— Bid. William Pahner apply to youtp send that proposal ? BatM
and Mr. Palmer came together with a proq^ctus to my offioe.

Lord Camfbsxi*.— Did you know Bates at that time ? Yics ; • ihBy oama together with
a prospectus, and asked me whether I knew if there was any agent jpi^ that office in the
. town of Rugeley, ami I told them I never heard of one ; &ey aaked me afterwards
whether I would write and get an appointment, because they wanted to raise some money^.
— ^Did you send to the Midland Office and get appointed their agent in order that this
insurance for 10,000?. might be effected on Bates's life? I wrote to the offioe.-^Did yon
apply to the office in order that you might enable them to ^ect the insuraace?
Mr. Serjeant Bhee, — ^Was it in writing ?

Mr. Attorney-General, — I ask whether you wrote io the office for the purpose of getting
appointed their agent ? — I did.

Mr. Serjeant Shee, — ^I think we ought to have the letter, and see what |ie did write.
Mr. Attorney-General, — ^Whatever vou did, did you do it to get the insurance effected
upon Bates'^ life for 10,000/.? I did; I will explain why that occurred; I never wa«
an agent for any office.— Was Bates at that time the superintendent of William ^almei'g
stud and stables? He was.— At 1/. a-week? I cannot tell.— Af^er this did you go to
the widow of Walter Palmer to get her to give up her claim upon the policy of h^
Husband ? 1 did»— Whet« was she ? At Liverpool.— Did you receive a documeirt from
Mr. Pratt to take to her ? Mr. William Palmer gave me one ; I think it most harve h^kn
directed tp him; I believe he gave it me.— Did the widow refuse ^ She said she' s&oold
like her solicitor to see it, and I said, ** By all meaasw"— Did sheunotrefcne tadn^dt?
She said «he shotdd like her ac^itor to seeit^^Did she not reAisatodo it, andlidid »ta
not bring back the doesBent? • Yes; I said^ ** I have no iD8trnatien» to leave ii;i Mr*
William Palmer wishes you Co dio it ; it shall be retmrned to yoa, and yoa oanitakayobr
soiicitor'jB advice nponit."«-Didahenot4«U yon that she had nndevsOood «t'w«ii£arAaao& ?
Mr. ^-»7*«mJj8fttfe.-*l8 this evi^ettoe against 'tile prisoner? ^ ' .» a^

Mr. Attom^y-Oeneral. — It is against this man; it is most important ds t6' his'crefljt.
Does yonr Lordship think that I cannot put the <5^uestion an4 take, myjdiano^ tilf an
answer? '/.',,' •..'." , '"

Lord Cakpbeix.— You inaH^ a^k him whfetliei:" he' "applied to her; aii(5^;vtether she
Tefhsed? . ^ ,. ,....,.., . > .,y

Mr. Babon Alderson.— The i^ea'son why ^he refhsed is another thiiig. ,

Mr. Atiormy-General (to tie witeess^'-^When.yon got that dq^iiipent,, tJ>je signature to

iieve
_ my

explanation.

■ Loid Camfbble* — ^Answer the question ; do not you. know that Walter Palmer ^ ot
nothing for that assignment ; answer that question first, and then give the explanation
sfterwtfds.

376 TBUt OT WQ^UAM EAUOSB.

Mr. AUtmtt^'^eBmd.'^-Do not |w Imow Attjie fvt aotyo^ft ^hatlWlB Mwr
signed that dccoiMiit wiUbDOl getting aoytluiig /or it? I bcbnai he nltMUri^ M
fojDcrtbiog.-^Did lie not eel a pi^ier ibr 2006 :« bills' J9e kJui a hpofe fmrmAeA fm
bin^^Do DoC yoo know that he got a bUilbr 200^? >».-frDonat jos lunr^but tlm
bUl va» nerer paid? I cannot ftdll that* — Dn^ not jon knov that trook WBham FiLncr^
I do not rMoUect that* — ^What do yoo mean bj a hoiue ianiish«il? A hoofe umu^
the Cattle ; WiUjam did it— Was Jiot there a man put into that han»e, who kept poi-
fescioD of it from th£ time that this iastmmeBl vai executed to the time thenaaditd?
I do not know thai there waa. — ^I will refresh jonr memory a little as to those pnpotth;
look at that TAz/jkIm^ a jMper Ut the trtbtosju and teU me whether that is your hsid-
writing ; were yon not applied to by William Palmer in the noyith of Deeenber Ib^iib
attest a proposal upon his brother's life for IZfiffOl* in the SoUcUocs' and Gcaeol Office?

Locd CAJU>KEU«--At zaj line?
. Mr. Attomty-Oeneral. — Look at your own signature there, and say vfaefher flat 'n
yonr handwriting? That is my own signatnra^-— Bcft«di yoor maiarj by meam of
that document; yon said that if yoo bad the document it would answer your porpdie:
were you not applied to by William Pakner in the month of December 1^94 to attest i
prDpoflal upon his brother^s life for 13,000/. in the Soliciton* and Geoeial OiBce ? I d»
not recollect that. — ^Not with your own ngnatnre staring you in the ihce: too ib
attorney, and aecostoned to business ? I might have been. — Were you applied t w by
William Palmer? It is frmu memory I am speaking, and therefore I widi to be as
correct as I on<*--6peak fwpn your m e m et y , refreshed by that documcBt ; hare yoo any
doubt about it when yen look at it ? 1 say 1 haire no doubt I might.

Mr. BeiiemU SAte.^het me look at it. ( TjW paper wom hamdad to Mr, Serjeant Skee.)

WUneus — ^The time is so long ago,

Mr. Serjeant Shee^r^li is " applied to by William Pdmer."

Mr. Attaraey'Oemerai.f^Yoa hare given him a strong hint.

Mr. Seryemtt Skee.-^^o.

Mr. . Utomefj-General. — ^Look at that document {tie iome being handed to the icUni»\ u^
see whether, in a month afterwards, you were applied to by William Palmer to attest
another proposal for 13,000/.? Whether that is my sgnature also. — Befrwhing yonr
memory by the document you are said yourself to ha^e sicned, have you any doobt thai
in the month of Jannair, 1855, you were called upon by William Palmer to attest another
proposal upon his brother's life for 13,000/. in another office? If you will ^vc ^"^^
paper .— Tou hare got it. This is my signature. — Look at it and see what it is? The

^ might.— Did yon sign .. . .«..» . , v«««v,. «.,v-. .

did not. — Do you believe tou did ? I hare gome doubt whether I did not sign scrertlw
fliose in blank.— -Whose handwriting is the body of it in ? William Palmer's.— Do»ot
trifle, ftTT, with the conrt and with the Jury and me ; answer the question, like a strai^*"
forward man ; npon your oath, looking at thai document, do not you know that Williaa
Palmer applied to you to attest a propoaal upon hif brother's life for 13,000/. in Janiiaiy»
in that office ? He did apply to me for a proposal in some offices in January.— Were they
fbr large sums of 13,000/. a-piece? One was for 13,000/.— Were yon asked to attest
another fbr a like sum in the Universal Office ? 1 might be, for this simple reason, twy
might say that they had not insured in the others. — ^Those were pretty much aboot toe
same time; you did not wait till the answers came back ? I do not recollect having a"J
answers at all. — I ask yon whether you were not applied tp by William Palmer to attest
aj>roposal to the Universal Office, after the execution of that assignment of the p<^cy o^
Walter Palmer's life ? 1 am not aware of it. — ^Will you swear that you were net/ A
think I might venture.— Will yoti venture? Ishcnld be. very sorry, if I was notqtute
positive, to swear that.— When was it that Walter Palmer signed the document a»&&^
the policy? I do ^>ot know when !t bears date.— About when? I have never seen the
assignment till I saV it thi5 morning.— You said that William Pa!mer gave it yoa ? ^
was not s^ed then.— ^Were yon not present w^en it was signed ? I do not recollect tt^
I was. — ^Will ydu swear yon were not? It Is a very good imitation of my ''niting.-'l'vr
you swear that yon were not present wten Walter Palmer executed the deed of **^![
ment ; be cautious, you will hear of this another day ; will you swear upon your oath t»^
you were not present when Walter Palmer signed that document ? I do not think I ^•^»
I am not sore ; I say, "Jeremiah Smith" is very much like my handwriting; the w^
part, « Solicitor, Bugeley," does not look like mine.— Upon your oath did you n^**^
upon some occasion or other, a deed of assignment by Walter'Palmer to his brother ox «*»

imetedi ifl 4i^ to\^ ft^ iei>0OO( ? I %m not tttdte |l66itiye : ft^ I said before^ 1 beUeve the
*'' J^rebnkdi fiinith *' l» t«iy iiipch like mT^hanawntiiig, bnt^ Rtigdey " is not.^I ask you
th^ qti«MiOf^ upob fovnt oirth, Whedier lit some time or otfwr yoa did not attest the asstgn-
liieirt br Widter Palnfet to 'Williium Patmer of the poHcy fot 19,000/.? I misht ; as I
said before, it is a vefy gobd iiiiitatiotr.^It hri< serions tldng, a policy fbr 13,OOof , a laree
ma^, do you tttedh to sav that yod d<y not knoir whether yon attestea it or not ? I mient
faav« Mtestedft; Iir^lfy do'ttot ]M>Ileet !t.->Did not yon get a cheque for 5/. for domg
it ; look al that and say wh^er ybu sav William P^almer write that on the counterfoil <3
hie cheque-book [(k|Mp^ being. han^ofid to the te^tneay^ is that Ms handwriting? That ia
WilHam' Palmer's handwritingj^Did not you see ^Im write it on the counterfoil of hia
eheque-bbok ? This i9 'Winiam Palmer's handwriting. — XHd you not see him write it ?
I might baye.^^Bid u6t ^ou? ' I canhot Say ]t>okiiiyeiy that 1 did.— Do not you know tbat
you got a 5/. cheque for attesting the execution of that' deed of assignment by Waiter
Palmeor to. his hfotherP : . , r » •. ; . •

Mr; JSerjednt J9heei**-H(fw can Iny learned iHendtalk <ef chequies, indthout producing
them?

M+. Aftomey^Getierah — ^Dld you get a piece 6f paper and' gto to' the bank and get 5/,
on il ? *

Mir. Serjeant Shee,—-l do not think that will do.

Mr. Momey-Qene'rah-^WiM it not ? Then we wiJi argue it.

Mr, Serjecmt Shee, — I subniit that it cannot be doae ; that is getting te contents.

Mr. Attomey-Generalj-^id yon get a piece of pap« and lake that paper to the bank,
and, haying handed it oyer the counter of the bank ta some olerky.did you get 5/. ?

Mr. Serjeant Shee, — Do not answer the question.

Lord CAUPBELL.-^That is a proper questSon.

I might haye got it from the bank ; but not jfbr the purpose ofaigning that document

— Looking at that piece of paper, did you not get 5/. for attesting the signature of the

brother to the deed of assignment ? I say that I might haye got 5^ from the bank, but

not for attesting that document. — I ask you, whether you did not get 5^. for attesting the

signature of Walter Palmer? I am not positive that I got it for that.— That piece of

paper seems to bum your fingers? No ; upon my honour it does not ; I ajn come here

to speak the truth as far as my memory serves me, for or against. — A word about that

200/. transaction, as to which you say you got 200/. for Mr. Cook, TOO/, from Mrs,

Palmer, yourfHend, and the other, William Palmer? Yes ; and he gave 10/. for the

accommodation. — ^To whom ? To William Palmer. — Do not you know that he gave

William Talmer his acceptance upon that occasion to enable him to make up the sum of

600/. ? I know that Wlllmm Palmer was the drawer of the bill, and Mr Cook was the

acceptor ; he received ^00/. "minus 10/. in cash. — ^Do not you know that the 200/. bill waa

given for the purpose of enabling William Palmer to make up the sum of 500/, payable

to Mr. Sargent? 1 believe* U was not, for Mr. Cook had absolute cash, the, 200/. 1 speak.

of. — Was it not to enable him to go to London to take up an acceptance? He did noty*

he went to Shrewsbury races with it; Mr. Cook did not. — ^What races are you speaking

of? At the time the money was lent by Mrs. Palmer and WiJliam.-r-Wnat tune was

that? I think in May. — ^Did Shrewsbury races tfike place in May? I believe so; the-

early part of May.— It was upon a bill of 200/. that went to Mr. Pratt ? I do not know

What became of the bill ; Mr. Cook gave him a biU for 200/., and he had.. the absoluta,

cash ; I brought 100/. firom William Palmer's mother, a hundred pound note, and h^,

had that which Mr. Palmer gave.— Whom was the biU drawn in favour of? . William,.

Palmer. — ^What became of that bill ? That is tie bill that is referred to in one of these

notes ; it was cashed.— What became of it? It was charged two ^ineas.— What becam^;

of it? I do not know. — He writes to you about the m6ne,y-lender haying issued a writ j.

who was the money-lender? Mr. PratJ, 1 belieye.r-Do not you know that ? ISo; when,

,the bill was given I handed it over to, Mr. Palmar; ,wj^at V.dia with it I do not know,-.

'—Did Mr. Palmer discount it with Mr. Piuft f l cannot tell that.;,! hfve, never seen

the bill since. — ^Was not it at the very time that William Palme? was. anort of money?

No, he was not short of money, because he lent Mri. Cook 100/,— JJO not you know that

he wanted some money to make up tjbe.s9^.9f 500(p payablp to Mf,. Sargen^ ? I do, not.

— ^You mean to represent that at uiat time he had money» and. was enabled to lend Mr.

Cook money instead of borrowing it himself? He lent Mr. Coek 100/. ; he lent him 90/.,

he took 10/. for the accommodation. — ^How often had you been to Mr. Palmer when he

was in Stafibrd gaol ? — I went once, but never spoke to him on the subject of hia

trial ; during the time that I was there an officer was in the room. — Were you at the

inquest? I was; but 1 was not to be examined, excepting there was something named

278 TKUL pF WILLIAM EAUffiR.

•boat tbe assignmeiit ; I md, if it wag poodscedr I would turybs^^ it Wim; Imnd-
writing. — ^That was another inquest; uot this, I think ; I am talking about Ifaeiofttedt dlNW
the body of Mr. Cook ? I was not present, I wac staying in the town. — Who aaw yoa wInb
yoB went in on Monday nig^t to Mr. Cook'a room at the Talbot Anna ? I cannot say whe-
ther it WES Mias Bond, or whether it waa the chambermaid or the wuter ; they gave nsa
candle, and we went n^ atairs ; I cannot say whether I took tifaie candle or Mr. Pahner.--
Ton named the waiter? Ye«» or Miss Bond, or lhe»i hanil mi tn aiif i One of theaethrM sav
•yon go np that evening? I do not know Aftt th*y cttwaa ; wenakid fiir a«and]e.*«-Wiio
wUl yon undertake to say saw yon that night go onto the Talbot AsBia, and go np toMr.
Cook's room ? I cannot tell yoa, Mr. Palmer waa in a harry to get down tahis molhei'f.
<— Who will yoa undertake to say, saw you go into the hotel that night ? I cannot say
which of the three. — ^Did either cue of those threes 1 believe it was on& — Will yoi
swear that either one of those three saw y ou, and gave you the candle ? I beUeve one
of the servants gave us a candle j I believe it to have been one of those three. — ^Who
drove the fly from Stafford ? I did not notice the man ; the moment that Mr. Palmer got

it, I said to him . — ^Never mind that ; do you know who drove the fly from StaffordV

I did not notice the man ; it was cold, and I did not notice who the driver of it was.

Be-examined by Mr. Serjeant Shee,

How long have yon known Mrs. Palmer ? Twenty years. — ^Did you know her before
her husbanas death ? Tes, I did ; I was not acquainted with her then ; it is aiaoy
years since. — How long is it since her husband died ? Upwards of 20 years. — ^What age
IS Mrs.. Palmer ? I should think about 60, by her sons ; she has grandchildren, and I
flhonld say she is 60.— Is William her eldest son? He is not. — Who is? Joseph.— Is
that the clergyman ? He is a timber merchant. — ^Whcre does he Kvfe ? In Liverpool —
About what age is he ? I should think Joseph -is about 45 or 46.— Who is the next son 't
I think George.— Is that this gentleman? Yes, I tinnk it is.— IMdiie lire at Rngeley?
He did. — ^Was he when there frequently at his mother's ? Frequently. — ^Was he
jioqnainted with yon ? Yes. — There is a son a clergynuu of the Church, of England, is
not there ? Yes.~Where does he live ? At Coton4n>£bne8.--How &r is Aat from
Sngeley ? Sixteen miles.— Was ?ie frequently at his mother's ? Yes^ tiU he \ieeme a
carate ; when he <»me from college he stayed at her house. — ^How [long is it siofle he
ceased to reside at his mother's hoase ? Two years. — ^Up to that time he lived at ias
mother's? Except when he was at college. — Have they a sister? They have.— Does
she live with her mother ? She does. — ^How many servants axe there ? Three.— Are
they acqnainted with the people in the locality ? are they visited mnch, or do they go out
much in the neighbourhood ? Not very mnch ; being a large.family themselves, they do
not vjsit much. — ^Is it a large house ? Yes, a good-sized house. — ^How many ^^^^'^^^^
lire tihere? there are plenty of spare rooms, are there not ? I think there are five bed-
jrooms.— -De yon mean besides servants' rooms? There are six altogetlier; there is>
loom for the man, and the maids occupy one ; there are four rooms for the fuoJ^yi ^
two for the servants. — ^What room did you sleep in ? I slept in one neairest the cbmca
JOB the opposite side. — ^Tliere is a church 4pse there ? Tl« old chavdi, and ^ ^^
X^urck is facing the house; the old chmrch is -at the. siide.-*-Js <them ai^ pteteoce vr
saying that you have been charged with any improper intimacy with Mrs. Palmer? 1
should hope not. — ^Is there any pretence for «apng;wy thing of the kind ? There OQ^
Aot to be. — Is there or is there not any pretence ISr saying that there is any trath ia^
^^Statement or spggcstion that yon hare been improperjiy int^^ti* at «ny time with Mn*
. 3?a]mer ? They might have said so, bnt they had no reason for saying so. — ^le there ai^
, truth in that statement ? I should say not, and J mean not. — ^When did you first hear oi
' the intention of anybody to insure Walter Palmer *s life ? when did it first come ^J^,
knowlei^Q ? X ^ not recollect its coming to my i^owledge till the inquest was he^?
.there w^ som^ talk ihen«

Lord ^CU|iFMm4M-*rWheo what inquest w»s jbeld ? 0» Mrs. Palaser .
' X^^ tft^yr^if^ed, ekd^ei^^ ^mi^iirne returned iriio^^

WltLIAM JOSEPH aAtJNi:)!£BS wa# called, bnl: did not appear.
Lord.CAMyiBigir«"»Let: lam hxaHsd on hig snbpcwuu
WUliam Joteph l6a«Enders was called three times by Bfr. Sitrkdr to appear on iu^

, Mr. Serjeant Shee^—ThaX is the oaJly witness we have to call.
Mr. AUomey^General^^i should be de^^ grieved if it could possibly be ^J"^-
that the ^absence of a witness coutd in any way prejudice the piisoner's €tf^* ^
iearaed friend makes any application on that gpow^ it i^U net be lenstod by o*^*

J

rMtk Mr, M'AT n, 'fsbf?; 279

•i-oej4«CaiiWMA«;.-^AlTh4»re«oe«'not apt^Wr' to' be the ^ghtest cHance; Wlias been
MHe#f«^tMj. -- ' ^<-' -' < -

Mr: Serjeani Shee,-^t have an apjpliQation to make to fixe Court. 1 call for a letter of
the 4t!i of January, 1855.

Mr. James. — ^What letter ? , , ',

Mr. S^emt S^€f-^ U^i^ itom Cofok to PAlmsr^ of the 4th of JBonary, 1S56.

Mr. Baww Auuman$ti^Thai ^m b«ea asked Ah* beibre.

Mr^ S0iij0cmt ShdeA^Y^,'Oiy'hoT&, 1 asked fbr*t before. ' I propose to read this letter,
BTfLonl.

The letter was hkriddd in and read as follows:-—** Lutterworth, 4th January, 1855, My
dear Sir, — I sent up to London on Tuesday to hack St, Hubert for 507., and my commis-
sioner has returned 10 to 1. I iiave therefore backed 250/. to 25/. against him to our
fain. Thfere is a small balance of 1$?. due to jou which I forgot to give you the other
ay. Ten Will to debit me with it on account of your share of training Pyrrhine. I
will also write to him to do so, as there will be a balance due from him to me. Yours
faithfully, ' ' " J. Pabsons Coojt.

" W. Palmer, Esq."

Mr. Serjeant Shee,' — I have to submit to your Lordships that I am entitled to a reply
upon some eridence given to-day.

Loid PiixPBELi.. — ^We will hear you upon that point.

Mr. Serjeant Shee,-^! submit to your Lordship, that the conrte whioh my learned
friend the Attomey-Oeoeral took jost now in getting out the substance of a cheque, and
the contents of an assignment of a policy on Walter Palmers life, which he might just
as weU have read, and his examining the witness as regards proposals to various offices
f<M* insurances on his life, entitle me to a reply on those points.

Lord Campbell* — ^We are all of opinion that you have no right tx> 9 reply. That is
the judgment of the Court.

^ Mr. Attorney-General, — I wish to call back, if your Lordships will permit me, Dr.
Bichardson. We were taken yesterday entirely by surprise; we heard, for the first time,
of angina pectoris, and be adverted to sev^ul books as authorities upon the subject. I
had not those books which I have now, and I am desirous, which I could not do yesterday,
of pitting further questions to that gentleman.

Lord Campbeix. — ^Do you mean simply to put a question or two as to the books he
referred to ?

Mr. Attorney ^Qenerol.-^'Xt&f my Lord ; we were taken yesterday entirely by surprise.

Mr. Serjeant Shee, — ^We might make the same application as to your wito^ises. How
were we to know what Br. Todd and Sir Benjamin Brodie would say ?
\ I Mr. Attomey^General^-^Yon knew from me.

Lord CABrpEBLL.-^It cannot be dene without the consent of the Court, ^ndi we thiofk
it ii^ better that the witness should not be recalled.

Mr. Attomey-Genera^.-^VtBiY it please your Lordships, — Gentlemen of tije Jarr, — The
case ibT the proseeutio9 and the case for the defence are now before ytouj aiid it oecomes
my duty to address to you such observ^tipns i^n the whole of the materials, apdn
which. your judgment is to be fbunded, as suggest themselves to my mind. I have a
solemn and an important doty to perform. I wisn that I could hare Kn$^ered the appeal
made to me the other day by my ^arned friend, Mr. Serjeant Shee, and have felt that
I was satisfied with the case that he -submitted to you ^n the part of 'tiied«£0nee. Bat,
standing here as the instnuxient of pubUis jps^oe, t.&el that I shonld tie wanting in the
duty that I have to perform if I did not as)^ ^t vpur hax^ds for a verdict, of, guilty against
the accused, I approach the oonsidetatloQ of the caste in what, I hope, I may term a
spirit of fairness, of moderation, and-of toiiik. My business ia fit> eQa«|«ee>you; tf I oaii«
by Uic^ and legitimate argumeRt, of tba pimi^er's guilt. If { etpnot eitabHsh it to
your satisfaction, no mau will rejoixse more than I shall in the verdict that jfoil will
pronounce of Not Guilty.

Gentlemen, in the vast mass of materials which the evidence in this case has brought
before you, two main questions present themselves prominently for your consideration^***
Did the deceased man, into whose death we are now inquiring, die a natural death ; or
was he taken off by the fiml means of poisen ? And if the latter propositton be sanctioned

380 TBtti^ 9? wmmi^^m^'

by your ftpprobatioo^ tlien comes dup imiMctiait-r^it pw^ ^ frttMrVio«(hi»poi«kM^
question of whether the prisoner st the har was the author pfhisiUfi^ 2- ,tl !irm<tt«ctMr
at once without further observation to the discussion qf . thpse qoest^iiw^ tvJkilQg tkvrn (ia
the <)rder in which I have proposed them. IMd John Panons jPqcJk 4i^ tiy poison^' ?!
assert and maintaiA the affinnative of that propostion. The case which is sulmiltled 10
vou on behalf of the Crown is this^That haying been first practised: upon \>f. antinonyv
ne was at last kiUe<f bj strychnine ; and the proposition which I hfvre ta cMblitJiis iluit
the death of the deceased was occasioned by th«i p^soa^.the^fiisl qiiet^^oi^'lfith.aTKW
of seeing what is the conclusion at vhich we shall anivy q{i9i^thal' poinil isj)^^iM^>ira« the
immediate and proximate cause of his death ? The witnesfea fo9 thie ipvoseCutiQil) Jbave
told you one and all that he died in ^teir judgment of tetanus* wlMch*s|ignx6esa4spam>^o
convulsive action of the muscles o£ the body« Can there beany doubi<^ilhai.Af»iioai
is correct? Of course it does not fblWw that >e«ause he died iDwp-^HasuS'il mast be
tetanus fVom strychnia ; that isa matter for a^r consideration ; butinasmaoh asWyehiuir
produces death by tetanus, we must se^ in the first place wbe^ier it adinits ^ any-dnsbt
that he did die of tetanus. J have listened yntix attention to every form in 'Wiibaoh' tbatr
disease has ^been brought under your considei^tion, whether by this positiye eitideDceof
witnesses, or by reference to the works of scientific authors; and I assart deliberately
that no case either of a human sutgect, or of any animal, has been brought .under .your
notice in which the symptoms of tetanus have been so marked as they are in ijiis case;-
fVom the moment the paroxysm came on, of wbich this unhappy man died, the symptcntt
were of the most marked, and of the most striking character. Every annaclei says 'tbd
medical man, who was pcesent at tbe time^ of his body was eonvutsed; he expre£^/the
most intense dread of suSbcation; he entreated them to lift him up lest he silQiiildi be.
suffocated, and when they stooped to nuse him every muscle of his body, frooai the<ennRv
of his head to the sole of his foot, was so stiffened that the flexibility of the ftnuk* andr
limbs was gone, so that they could have raised him as you would raise a dead eorpsevcfi
a lifeless log. It was found to be impossible, and the man prayed to be tnmeicver m
order to escape fVom the sense of the imminent risk of suffocation ; they turned Jumo^^^
and in the midst of doing so a fearful paroxysm,, one mighty spasm, seems to have seised
U)H)n his heart, to have pressed from it the life-blood, so that in a moment vitality ebbed^'
and the man was dead before them ; when dead, the body exhibited the most marked
•yiuptoms of this most fearful disease -, it was bowed from head to foot, and it woold bave
rested, if it had been so placed, says the witness, upon the back of the head, andthebeels;,
the hands were clenchea with a grasp, which it required power to ov^coibe, and tbff fee*
were curved till they assumed the appearance of a natural malftwmation. It is ins^ossiWt
XO conceive symptoms more striking of tetanus; nor is it possible to i conceive evidfnce
more dishpnest toaa that which has attempted to represent it as a»}F' other than as a case

of tetanus,, ^ . ,.,*, .. . ,,. . ,.:

Well, then, if it was a. case of tetanus, as to which I will jjot wfaate.yovtime with any
n^rlher observations,. :was it a case of tetanus from strychnia ? I.^w^ill cmifine myself far
the moment to the exhibition of the symptoms as they have been, deseadbed by the wit*.
Aess^s, Tetaaus may proceed from natural causes as well as fropa; the administration of
ppUop. ,^hile the symptoms last they are the same, bi^ in the course of the iqnnptoiBS
before the disease reaches its consummation in the death of the paftient the distinctioa
between the two i? marked by characteristics irhich will enable, any one conversant with
H}?. subject to, distingviish between the pwo. We htve. betH/told .upon the. hi^est
i^utftorlty that the djsfinctions arie these iTTt-Natu^al tetamus^jte a disease sot ctf minute^
not evep of hours, but of days, ^t tak^» say severalof thct ^tnegsesv ftwn thtee.to fow
days, and Willi extend to a. period, of even thr^e iveeks, beW ithe patient is destroyed.
Upon that point we havC; the . moift labund^ant- and, ccpotclusive eyidtenoeJ We have the
rT^*S^*?j^i' - ^f'^^'®^^^ ^^ ^^^^ made.it.liheik espe<ual tstttdy, like Mr. Curling vd
Dr. Todd. . We hay^, , the evidence <>f ope , o^. thp 4»fl$^ - emmepit practitioners wio ever

natur^ tetanusr, we have the evidence,. oj? a: gentlewan who practised for twenty-five
years in India, whfere,,9wing;to the particular ph?«:»C*er of the climater, those cases ^
Infinitely more ,l^reanent ^n.^heyf preseitt!li,.themselTires here* and he* gives estaetiy die
jame de8criptio^ ofthe-cjours^ off/eymptoaw throt^gh whikch thjsdiseiwe runs. Idiopaliufi
or traumatic tetanias ^e ther^e&oret.iipqp t}^. evidence out of thft question; but trautastia
tetanus is out of the questi^ fpr a, very different neason. Traumafi^ tetanus \s tetanns
brought on by lesion <of sgane part qf the bqdy. , What is there ia* this particuter case to
«iow that there was lesion in any part of the b<?dy at all? We have hdd the m***
ir representations upon the subject of Mr/Copk!s health madie. by the iritnflsfitf

>tl^^*«' iJAV, *k^ ^; 44^'."' 281

iHi9liBI^(MM'%er^^ft "l^^l^irtf Ihj'den^^^tfiia Wbo'iippear to' Hire come into that
iom^mi^Vti^ det^rtASttktiMi a* fkt- jte fb^iMetd'tiuMioiiceWe every fact which they could

50r«iHlt4>^tfl«i#pwrpd8e:: We-fcall brfbfeyon f6t the pxnrpog^ of showing what Cook*^
ealtta'WM'ati-c»ibihi«M-^b^dto Who' btMbad'him' tender tin care. It seems that in
tHeii^flg'Of I«9» 066k;' having fotmd eertkhi ^tikll spots manifest themselves in one or
tWO'portt^f <li)ft-%Mdjr;'i«^id;iibMbg'b6me(Uiiig oflll<i^ Ms tongue, or in his throat,

eoiiMivod'<'tlilir ftfe-Wttii laiybtirtnl -tmlttir ^yiii^ioiAs 6f'a' panfcolar character, and he
tiMf«ttiMl'ki«H«lff"tti' Bi^/^HigeV i^6 fMidL th^' <iOfitse' or medicine he had- been pur-
soih^^ fottntled^t^li' iRf^^b^er, WiatsV iii'^^^ it^gmlsnt, an efYoneous one: he altered it
aitogetiM»r)> h«'«^<yMed<th«^ discohtiiittance df^mercm and w^ obeyed in his injunction ;
and the iestttt was'that tH« dtf^^ased; w>o %ias ^ffemg; h6i from disease, but from the
treaHmoDtf 'htf^idl^^ ^W-Wtefl. NevierrtieldsJ, lest there fihotdd be the possibility of
mistake^ Drf<SiiMBge^lfiMlAe ftimfi^me'to'bim'frdw'tim^ to' time that he might see that
tinn^'iifere g4$iiig't)ti right, and: lif«f''sees,'I^g bldfo^thl^ kmmter had advanced, the very
nna&iuitohy ^fmptom^ ba!d etitifely gone, Had that tfaevd -^as nothing about him except
that'affiMCion of the throat to Which sometimes people are subject, some abnormal con-
ditioa ol-otia of the toih^ite, but in other respects the man was better than he had been^
and 'might be tsM to ht perfectly convalescent. On the very daCy he left London to go
into' tkt»«Datilryabottt a forfni^t before the? races, his step-fkther accompanied him to
ttestatidft and coagrAtiilated him npon his healthy and vigorous appearance, and th6
TOUBgnictti/iA the eottScAotMneSS of the possession of heaKh, «tmck his breast, and said
he wms'Well aad he ftit so.

WaH,' ho goes to Shrewsbury, and shortly afterwards came thosb matters to which I
slutll'fln^ to call yonr attention presentlpr more particularly that ended in his death. I
vBnt'to knopw upon what part of this evidence there is the sli^tdst pretence for sayii^
itait this nas had any alreetion about him from which trauntatic tetanus could ensue. It
it swdatsone former time he had exhibited his throat to some of the witnesses who were
called^ and that he had applied to Palmer for some mercurial wash to apply to his throat,
or some of tfaoM uleers. The precise period of it is not fiked, but it is perfectly clear
thst though he had at one time adopted that course, undCr the recommendation of
"Otj Sftvage^ he had got rid of it ; and there is not the slightest pretence for saying that
dii« man wft88uflR9rin|^ tinder a syphilitic affection of anv kind ; nevertheless that fact wa$
dssthietly and uneqnrvocally negatived by a man of the highest authority — a medical
gentlehnab of enlinetace — under whose treatment the man got so rapidly well. That fact
is assnm^ by the witnesses for the defence as the ground upon which to suggest that
theme waf traumatic tetanns in this ease. It is a pretence, gentlemen, which has not thcl
flfawkyw of a ffbundation, and which I should be shrinking ftom my duty if I did not
deaoaneft aa aftog«th(<r nnwofthy of your attention. There was nothing about th<^
man, according to the statement of all those who were competent to give you an opinion,
which 'WDiAd'Wim&t^Kvf'a^alhg'le nioment the supposition that there Was anything in any
pairt of title man^abodT Which oottM justify the notion of traumatic tetanus ; even if thete
were, the eha^aeter whieh his tryhiptotns assumed when the tetanus set in is utterly incom-
patible, aooordiftig tO' the evidence of all the witnesses, with a case of traumatic tetanui^^
One or two oases of tvaumAtio tetanus have been adduced in evidence on the part of the
defcnce. We had tiMsr oaSe of a man Vho was brought to the London Hospital in thQ
evening, and who died "Uie same night. Yes, but what were the fActi of that case? The
ihettatfe, that he had had' before he was brought 1*^ repeated paroxysms ; that he fel'f pre-
monitory symptoms early In thenkoniin^* he was suffering from ulcere of a mos^
aggravated desmptiott; and l^at the symptottis had run their course rapidlyit is trueit
bat Btill the disease was not a niatt^ Of mi^ht^s, biit a thbttef of hours. Th^re i^ no
other case that I am ^wwreof. Ther^ Is the'Caije of the hoy who was brotight in, if it be
iteoassary to allttde to'it. Bli^ theii&'agai'a weha*^ th^ disease existih^ fpr spme tim^
hefiireit'ends tB'death, It isa n^tl^r'tftbrb agAin of htiurs, and hot of mWutes, and not
a single paroxysm- like' this wa*/ • B<(t it is then soggested 'thdt'thig may hacve been b.
case of idiopathic «)etanus. Idiop«tfai<^ tietanus pi'occedfrigfi-om'tfrhkt'? Thet say tha-t
Mr^Ckiok was a man of delicafte*oottBtittitlOff— s"ribject to exfeltenlent'— that hfe had some-
tiang the matter with his ch^st-H^at; in addition to '^4ting Som^thiii^ the matter with
his ohest^ he had this dis^Ased eondiliOii of 'the throat— aiid,']^ttTng all these things
together, they say that th# man, if he took ccfld, mi^ht get'*id5bp6(thic tetanus. We are
lannched'into aiica of speculation aUd of pMsibfRti^s. Mt. Nunneley, ^ho comes forward
here for the purpose of inducing yon to believe' that theire was anything like idiopathic
tetaans, goes through a bead-roll of the supposed itifinhities of Mr. Cook and talks about
lus ezcitability^-4a&s abont his delicacy of chest-^talks ahdut the affection of his throat —
goes thuougb those various heads, 4Ud Savs that those things may have predisposed him
«> jdiopflthic teuuiw if he'toi* edd. 'Whftt evidence is -Chere that he' ever did take cold?

282 TRiAL OF WU^LI^^ FMJim.

Not the slightest in the world. Th« jncmf &om tbe^ homing ^o^iIm'CwI «£ ib/Mnpaa^^bomBt

was never treated for cold by anybody, or aver eampTaiiked that lie had takon ,ookL' i
cannot help saying to me it seems that it is a scandal oiKmalcariMd^adisttiigiiiiiiedv mad.
a liberal profession, that men should come forward and put forwasd 6aiid&.spte«lalieBto as
these, perverting the facts, and drawing icw^ tham. avphisiieal «mL BiiwBitiaiited cam*
elusions, with the view of deceiTiug a jury. I have the gMat«at respect f<ar fmum^-^m^
man can have more ; but I cannot repress my indignation and abhorttnae vh6» I-ate it
thus perverted ajod prostituted to the purppses oi a parti««lar eaowm »«aiirtiiafi joaCice.
Do not talk to me about excitement, as Mr,.Nunofley did tiwo&er. day^« being tke
occasion of idiopathic tetanus, Ypi^ cemember the sprtS'of. «iaxiteBeait;i» «p4»ka o&
They are unworthy of your notice, and they were ti)pi€Stdiscrecbtal^4o bespat ioi^asFd by
a witness as worthy of the attentiox).of sensible mm oOiMtituAixi^siuhA tiibmal aayon^aie*

But suppose for a single mpment that ex^tesMDit of <thM kmd fsanid^prodoee any aacii
effect or influence, where is the escitei^ent manifested by Cook aaleadsagtojtfaMsap*
posed disease ? They say that the man, when his 9»aie won At Shrawahuiy', vaa.&Uaf
excitement ; and weU he might be ; his fortuia^ depended upon the jesak tA thai race;
and I do not deny^ for a few minut e s he was overpoweiwd by tha eaioti<maijyiat tkaji^
of the moment excited in his breaat. But that aohsided^ and wa have>aO'fiirthes tiace^Mf
it from that time to the momant ol his death. The maft passed tha vest af iht» day with
his friends in ordinary conversation, and .in ordinary enjoysM&t* No traea oSeaiedoii
was left about him. He is taken ill ; he goes to Bageley ; he ia taken illtheoe agai»?
is there the slightest symptom of excitement about the man, or, on. the athev hand, of
depression ? ^ot the slightest in the world. When he ia ill, like mast odiar people, he
is low ; but as soon as h» gets a little better he is cheerful and happy ; he adniits hi*
friends, and be convecsea with tham tha very nlRht ol his death ; so nir from any eoEeida*
ment, his conversation is full of cheerfulness and mirth— he is laagbiagaad happy^litlie
thinking, poor wretch, of the fate that was impending over him. He ia- chaeifal and
happy, talking of the future, not in the language of excitement on the one hand, or of
depression on the other. What pretence is there for this idle story of exeitemant and
depression ? Not the slightest shadow of foundation in the world* fiat if these wei»*«-'
If those things were capable of producing that form of tetani^ which goes by the term
** idiopathic, the character of the disease is so essentially different tiiat' it is iraposaihle
to mistake the two. What are the cases which they attempt to set up against it? They
have brought you the case of Mary Watson, which a gentlemaa oame all- the way fiom
Scotland to tell us about. The girl had been ill all day. 8be was takeaa with enmipfl ia
the night, probably originating in the stomach, extending to all other paito of hee body.
She gets well in a very short time, and goes about her business. Ia that case to be o&a^
pared for a single instant to the death agony of that .wretched many and the paroxysm
that destroyed nim ? Those are the sort of cases with which thoy attempt to meet sock
symptoms as those which are spoken to by the witnesses aa acoonipaiiying tho deoeaae
of Mr. Cook. . . , . • ■ .

Gentlemen, I venture, upon the evidence, to assert boldly that.the cases of idiopathie
tetanus s(nd traumatic, or what X may call natural tetaoua, are mai^d by clear aiid dls-
4nct characteristics, distinguishing them from the tetsmua prodaced by stryehnia ; aad
1 say that the tetanus whidi accompanied Mr. CooVs death is no$ relienible to other «f
l)iose forms of tetanus. You have upon that point the evideuce of witaeeses of the
^ghest competencry^, and of the most unquestions^le integrity ; and uf ob their evidenee
I am ^uite satisfied you can come to no other conclusion but that thiawas aota case either
of idiopathic or of. traumatic tetanus. But thea they sey it may ha«e been something
else ; and various attempts have been made to set up different oausea as capaUe of pro-
ducing this tetanic disease. And,first, we have the theory of geneial convulsiona ; and Mir.
Nunneley, having gone through the beadrroll of the sap|^9sediinficmiities of Mr. Cm^sayv,
'^ Oh, this may have been a case of geneial comrulsiona ; I have known general coaval-
sions to assume a tetanic character." WeU, but .pause a moment, Mf». Nuaaeley, have yon
ever seen one single case iu which death arising isom, general eoa^mkioiis, aeeompaaaed
with tetanic symptom,Sf.haa not ended in.theunccMsoioDSBesaof the patient before death?
" No, I never knew such a case-^aot one. * But in, some book or otieuer, I am told that
there is some such case, reported ;" and ha cites, not for that paryoser I think, bat he
cites, with reference to ^i^neral coavulsiona being sometimes aceempaaied with tetuuc
symptoms, and ending in death, a very emdneat author of the pEesent. day; ^ laeaii
Dr. Copland. Dr. Copland is living, and Dr. Copland mi^t have been called. The
author of the book, I a^urehend, would stand before you as a higher amthority thin a
man who merely quotes the book as the foundation, of his knowledge* Dr. Coplaiid
mi^ht have been called. Dr. Copland was not called^ notwithstandibig the ekumemg/i
which I threw out. Why ? Because it is infinitely bettev in audi ^tase «> esttlogeUMr

r&rm. dat, ^t^ 24, 1^50. 283

fioBi tive •eestfttoid' ft«iiflli«<«rMt pmttHieftenj of mor^ or less obsearify, ixtsf ead of bringing
t* b«ar upon/illie sabjedt tbttliglvl of science ^i^ikh is treasored op in the breasts of the
eiPune&ApnMkitiatteBa'withwhoan this jg#ea« city abounds. Dr. Copland is not called;
bttt i say, asi^gatds geDenl coivrulfllons, the distinction is plain, that irb«re thej destroy
the patientthi^ destMf^ oouseiinisnese ;- and heiretlt is nnqnestionsbly the ifaet, that to the
lastmomeutof MarjGook^orislenee/lniiil hi« bunted' beam ceased to beat, bis con-

Bat then: «oais «ig«her M^iOMd eonditibni fhnt which death in this :£bim may be
said to have /is8idted> aad' tlMt is* the 'diae* which was intended to be set np by a very
emineHt prac^tienorv I mean Mr. Pafttfidge. ItseepfB thaT in the posC-^nortem examinar-
tion. ef Mff. CSp^, wfan Ihe spinal ttanrow "was 'ittvestigaAed, certain gtamnies were
found, and thoa- is sciaed tipcalv H is <said, *< Oh, those grannies may have occasioned
tetanic con:viiisiaaB.Mnlar to tiMSe which wet>e ftMHnd in Mr. Cook's case/' and a very
^auneat gentlemao it 'cafled tor git« his opiiiion tipdn ' OtaLt subject. I admit bhn to be not
only a man of gNaS enthtettce, but* mam «ff> the' hljghest honour and the most perfect
veracity. lulkulete iMn Partridge^: Inraat distinguish between ham and other of my
learned frieod^a witeesses. S^me there were who weuldr not be indueed, for any con-
sid^ation in the worlds te swerve- froat what' they beliieved to be titetrath. Mr. Part-
ridge is ciaUed here to ptovef^at iHm was^ case ef what he called arafehnitis/^Mnfiammatiein
of the aranhnea in eonseqvence of the gnmttleSy or some other abnonaal condition. I
asked him dhe sympteraa which he would find m sach a case. I called fais attention to
what effidently had' aot been dome befbre^ namely, the symptoms of Mr« Cook's case:
and I asked haaa, in simpfes, straightforward terms whether, loMbn^ at those symptoms, he
would pledge his c^ioiion, in the &ce of the medio^ world aixd the Conrt, that this was a
oa«e of aradknitis, and he can^dly admitted tlmt he would not asssi^ that, this was in his
o^iaion a ease o£ asachaj^a.

Then we ha;7e the gentleman who cones all the way from Scotland to inform us, as
Hi^ next proposition, &at Mr; Cook's was a ease of epileptic convulsions with tetania
OonaplioaAioiHU Now, I asked him this question : ** Did yon ever know a ease of epilepsy,
with or without tetaaic eonvulsioas, in which consciousness was not destroyed before the
patient died? " He said, '^ No ; I eaanot say that I ever ^, bat I have read in some
hdok that such a ease has occurred." — ^* Is there anytliing to m^e you think that this
was epilepsy? '* ^' Wdl, it may have been epilepsy, because I do not khow what else to
ascribe it to; but I must admit that epilepsy » characterised generally by a loss of coni«
selousness.'' Well, then, what difference wotdd tetanic complication make? That he is
unable to ezplaia* I remind you of t^t species of evidence in which the witnesses
resorted, to the* most speculative reasoning, and putt forward the barest possibilities
witkoot the shadow of a foundation. Bat tiiis I undertake to assert, and 1 refer to lite
evidence toprov«it, that theve is aot a smffle case Mtiier to which they have spoken as
coming within their .own experience, or of which they have spoken as the result of
reading, in whicb there were the formidable and decisive symptoms of marked tetanus
whidi e^sted in ^is ease of Mr. Codt.

Having gpne thioagb this evi^noe,, I think we have fdur sets of ^seases,~genera]!
convulsionsy agaftbaitis,- epilepsy proper, and epilepsy With tetanic compHcation. I;
expected that we hud pretty w^l exhausted the whole of those scientific theories, but w^
were destined t» have another that assumed the ftmmdable name of angina pectoris, i
do not know whether it stru^ you as remaorkable that when my learnt friend opene<{
this case for the de£eiioe, he never veatufod to assert what would be the nature of the
disease t» which he would endeavour to refer the symptoms of Mr. Cook ; and it must^
I thi&k, have struck you as a^very remarkable thing that no less than four or &79
distinct and separate theories are set up by tl^ witnesses who appear on the part of tha
defence,' — ^enoral convulsions) araehniltis^ epilepsy with tetanic eomplicatien, and,
la^ly, angina pectoris. My learned fbiend had', however, this advantage in not stating
to you what was the theory that his- medieal witnesses ' wodld endeavour to set up,
because, osie after another, I must adnvH they took me entirely by surprise. 'The gentle^
man who' was- caUed yesterday at the last mottient, and who ta&ed of ajagina pectoris^
would not have esoijped quite so easily iif I hfeid faaid the booses to Which hereferred under
my hand, and had been able to expose, as I would have dohe^ Ihe ignorance or the pre»
sumption of the assertion which he dared to miikke. I say ignoranee or presumption, or,
what is worse, an intention to deeeive. I assert it in the face of the whole medical
pirofes6i<Hk, and I am satisfied I shall hate their verdict in my fiivour*

But it iaa &ct whieh I am entitled to dwell upon, that till those medical witnesses^
^e and all> differed in Ihe view wki^they take in this ease. There is tfab remarkabltf
coiaeidestee> between, the views of seme of them aind Ihe views of the witbesses wham I
called;. Miv Pwrtridge aad Dr.. Bobinsea, two of the asost lespeetstbk iritnesses they

264 rifjA i» imukki-iE^VXk.

e^ed, are, kiid Dt*. Le^Oft ^ittSsOfpMsit^'iM W^^i M Sl ki i fi i m i mf Hti Hk 9sffSttt,

being thre* of liie moit e Mnent 6f the wito Sfa % htt ttl nrr felilbl^im^lJaHM«m*<bb^

agreed wHh the ftatetteattnail^ Vf Sir 'Benjaflitii' SiVi&v 'ttAd'IMffi^ortel^ (ivr<<fi%bf^ii4t^

seises whom I Intmghtbefbf^ Yon, "ilrtt'iki ijiewkftle^f <fa><ii^'<<4ycw».'I''th^t lytW

whole range Cft fheir learo^ fOid infbhaM&n; liieV kiMi^'oriN^lmfMI^Mea^ tftMi

the flymptomg of Mr. COok eoiilft 'pMflSI^'lM^'HIKmlV'^WlMfril raili^AA lM^Mi(!l«tf

uf such a fact, I cannot bfit ^uMuit to 7tml!kat,lt'U MpomWk ie^'^ici |AC W te ^i##tapH'

ance. Bat, (be^, if !t V tfa6^ Ihet <hat n>^ki^^<»ie<artf<afirf%U!8gtf W^

as those of Kr. Cook, and UttV'tl^ ar^ Y««M4im"«kf ttdi<fej<"WiiH. c# H' te) r T 6fe' AHefj;

tain a doubt that thatvo«i<Mi ^a^'thel^oiaoii'ttf Mt^htiia-f'^^ ¥Mff|^

fh>in the time the Mfwrsnrset Iti^are pte(i:My'ihti taftfe. ^■^1»tf»cBbtf tt ^ i fti tt^ W T ] ^

no foundation in Iket.' 1 think I ititty tdke-tbis/hoireter/ albftir-'WA iUe''-'«t^'tW^6i/,
that the witnesses called fbr the d^ehee'aAuH UtiH fuit, thMf^frOvi^HIRi tiiift mtf-pni
roxysm set in, of whieh Mr. OoMc dMd,'nnt!i the thne off ther'HM«iffi,tte'iqrM«6itt«
are preciself i^milar to Hht symjimni^'df fetaxmafhttft strrehnia: "RiTthen 'Oiey^wiy,
and this is worthy' of >DUf most attentive bonfiideration, tiiat theit^'atie pcMi \>f dif-
ference which haylf led tbem to the cbttdhigion, or some of them at aH tf^eML %at
those symptoms could -fiot have multed ft^m strydinia. Let us le^ what'tid^ arei
In the first place,' they showbd'that i!he period which elapsed beti»een ' Ihfe I s M^be^s fl
administration of the ;poisdU; and the first f^tpearance of the 8ynl|^tom9,'Waa'loiigser
than they haVe eret <mberved in animids upon whidi they have eicpeiteent^). * 19b>i^
the flnt observation witich arises there is ihis^ that there is a known dS ff gn tee e be^
tween animal and Human 'lift<, in the power with which spedflc tfaingB act 'ixp^ Its
organisation ; and it may w^ll be that the poison administered to a ram>it iHlt *tiiMu6e
its effect in a given time ; it by no means follows that it nrfll produce effeii fn th6
same time upon an animal of a different description ; and still lest does it fblhy^ thai
it will exercue its'banefhl influence in the same time upon a human' «ub}<s<;t. '''The
whole of the evidence on both sides tends to establish this &ct, that not only ihlndSvi*
duals of different spedles, but between individutds of the same species, the saortf f^^sOn
and the same dose ^Hl produce effects different in degree, different in durafifon, and
diffbrent in power.' But, a^ain, it is perfectly notorious that the rapidity witii ^f^hich
the poison begins to work depends materially upon the mode of its administrt^tion.' If
It Is administered as a fluid, it acts with great lapi^ty; if it is administered in a
solid state, its effects come on more slowly ; and n it is administered in aome indu-
rated substance, it win act with still greater tardiness ; and if that substance ia difflcuK
of solution, then the period will be still loneer before the substance having become' Sit-
Bolved, is acted upon by the absorbents, and taken up into the syateui. '

Now, what was the period at which this poison began to act after ittf administ^fion^
assuming it to have been poison for the purpose of argument f 'It seems from Mr. Jones's
Itatement, that the prisoner came and administered these pills ; he saw him administer
the pills somewhere about 11 o'cTock, so that they were nm administer^ upon his fit^t
arrival. The patient, as though with an instinctiYe sense 6f the peril irhich impended,
atrenuously resisted the attempt to make him take them, and no doubt those remonstraHees
and the endeavour to overcome them occupied some period of time. The pSUa at- last
were taken, and, assuming them to have cobtldned strychnia (wiiich I only do now fbr
the purpose of argument) how soon did they' begin to operate t Vtf. Jones says he went
down after this and had Ms supper,' and caufe wck aJlKmt \i o'clock. ITpon h& returfr to
the room^ after a word or two of conversatidh With Co6k; he proceeded to undress and go
to bed ; and he had not been in bed 10 minutes 'before the warning came that anotiier of
these peiroxysms was about to take place. The maid-servants put it still ^earlier : l!hey say
tiiat about 10 minute befbre'12 the first' ithtrm was j^vten; which wtmld mtke the interval
little more than three-barters of an hour from the ticking of the pills and the flrst manf*
festation of the symiAaftis. "When; there^(M,WyJeariteafMettd's wttnesses teH us that
it took an hour and k half or two hohtt; iti h&Ve hefe toother of those exaggerated
determinations to^ e;ee the flicts only In the'wiiy tbilt will "make moat fbr the* view wliidi
they think proper to put fbnrtrd. T sayHcertafely wtt^not more thacn an houf, and Tiiktl
in some of the experiments diat have been made, that the duration of time befbre whkh the
poison began to work, haa been little less, if atty less, thto an houK Mr. Morley, who is
aa much entitled to your attention as Mr. Nutfneley— indeed, when I contrast the way
in which th^ two men gave their evidehoe, I am paying him but« poor compliment
when I say that he is as worthy of attention as Mr. Nunneley — Mr. Morley says in

'videnoe that 6 or 6 minutes, or sometSdng lesa l&an an h<Mdr, iitha period whidk he

.mami^jk:^fm % i#*'

28lr

S(^f^,Wi^ m p«l4aa^fl*wi^;tl)«» I W.^wir 7^9$ necesiary. In tlie

^^t;JjK>agVi'9^r^QM#c4^«9Uiei^ nunutes vhen

dimi')6 f!i^;;))ff4tbiUriiijfoiw^o^^Von^ t^e st^tem^nt of some of the

[ik\ff99^^mgf^yf, ji9^iifXff9jqfi^f^T8tQfm}ma^ before the pills began

»P«t »VMBr*ff« ']fV(Wf mv*WH.J>^Pfoi^ft,(iy tb« piU« not beginning to

iHAF]^A)«9C^fp 4m.«^r ^}i^ijiH^Wws^ra^Wi,it .would be very ensy to mix

iffm 9mt Jlfl^ l iM W^ ^ Wfeg fe j^l^ of toUttion^ nay^ which might

¥W«f'/Wl«<»io Tfpju^|<&r.* wfi^iff-9|i>fn;t,Jt)riM^aipwaf .tp.W^ if in aU other

m«k^§m9ffW m^^S^i^Vf'^f^ »»i effects were

<W < ijliVMWT^^P^ 'M9<i^fifftvW^j»frywifty.tf M^t^^^canse those pills may

^ , » 4'ft»Wt^r^-*P*Wt05'*'Hwerj.1iiW V^,MmW»I.WH' Forking, it is not on

W^ ltS9^^^¥^9^Viim¥^Pm^ ^^t. sftychpia w^ administered

^^k^^tf^A^J^^fi^i^Ji^^'^^plP^^m KffPO^^to^)^JTO^W we»e wanting here.
fe*f»I^»«-W llWah.tftf y^H*^.^.^t o^ ^%W iWtf%*8.AJ3lt some uneasiness.
*»ft g|ljh<iwi.itieu-mt<^^it#cJ4f^,ait,,w^l?,.t^T,oi^ iMv^j^^t n^, ,and then certain
Wy,ilyi^(BWw ^bo^t theJiiw pjft^t.f^ej^ftii^g^^ep^pire^jionitory symptoms.
. .., ^•JSe|i?y%fln8ae*i^,,. Yl\^fl^^ 8ympV>in^ in Cook's

^m %'^MMitwly deny^ tl^it ,pj|op<M4.tion ? , I ,^ *«?;«. .^ff?^ , Hjempji^t^iy, symptoms of the
»qf*P^Jff^.<Pfraf»<^ ^^ »o^ ^€|?c^bi9 .thefji W^df^^fiW^g^,. W.w lyi»g la

l^-^jm4^^^..8tayts,un in anagJWt'Of alarfu^ , >V4iaJi.,wd^ f *Wi4p^ ijiat? , w^ there
" ^*^ '' , mr/^IQf^QMpry^ nptiw«tw>t, warned, him 44i*jt (tH^.jjj^fpxysfl^ ,w8^ pomihg ? It is
.ff« HMttthwr^ Ji)een. ll^iwupsjip iftJiis l^f^ 9^4 s^Sn *! *^^' m^,^4m^» I w
to )i^.]t(,.«is I Was last ni^t;-" W^at was zt but thflit he .Js^ey, the Symptoms that
^^n^^ lOBpL on the preFTloos eyening wer« now wacnii^g ^l^ii^ oi^f ^^rlmt^c Jmi/it, expect

could 1^ obtained ?. Hei sits up, apiWpmys to 1^

;ip5^^^jmtperi9«i»!Mdes8 succour I ... , .„ . -

i^^^DJi)^ : Wlhat was the feeling about the neck but a priemQn^jt^irY/^mptom, which
^jii ^ pir^iWe. t^e , paroxysm which. presently siij^rven^d I He , j^y^f ,** ffu^ flay.j^^eck, it
^^AWpofliibrttQ have It done.'* . .. /

,, .iBut nere- again .they take exception, and they say [this coul
fpn^.^trycjtnia, because animals cannot bear to be touched;
p^ro^Simi not oidy a touch, but a breath of air, a sound, a^wpf;4^.a,"?^pyipfla|^^t"of an
^ne n^^j will.hring.ona recurrence of the paroxysmr. Tl?ieA..J)Uj ,jjtia.t^ig',after ,ta$
jf9,Toi^y9fpi. .haa once bo^i^ set , up, or when it is just about tqr.b^gii^*, It.ifi,^Ujite,ckar, ^^
^6se,in^esi^l& Triio come and say that the fact of Mr, Cook wing desi|:ed tjp hav^ bis
neck rubbed is a ikct.to,pi|ove that this could not be a. d^thf^om tetapu^s^J^y^ etthoii
wiXiUUy snppressed the knowledge in their own minds. of the evidence. they lx^,bQ^»
oiir ti)^ ha4 P^ DP i^ttention to it; because in two cases of death fro;n,^ti;ychnia we h^y^
showj^i. the patient endi^red the touching of the limbs .and found sat^faj5tipij,fr9mit, \^ tn
Mrs. Smyth's case, whjen her legs were distorted, in the agony, o^.Jhe^conyimioi^ &he
]^f;agrj^.^4 fffAr^l^ to have them straightened^ she /pujidno ^dditiaHs^ p^m.ircua^^that
^eraijon^/ Th?, lady ^at Leeds, in the case which Jtfr- J^JunxieleyJpJpjsel^i ft^tq^^^d^
implored her husband, betwi^ the ^asms; to rub her, legs, ^dh^.aTOs»^|n.'0;[;4^rJ^
overcome and «»bdy« their ' jpigidity^ ,Xhat case was. under hi^ owi^ k?^o^le4ge, acid ^^
^ite of tt, altjb^ough.be detected jifter wards strychn^,ii\ th^ body of thai uimapp^
won^n, he d^res to cbj?ie forward here and s^y thai, th|^ fecjt'of i^i^^ C(K)X^^V^)^^9Fti
the pi^oxysm tolerated xi^j)b'^MV.wd|pjin^.^^ in U, provi^s th^t^' :th^,,cp]u^^ jiotMife

been. a death fi^ s^ycjmia. ,, Vyhaj W^ J^^ ^^ ^^^ honesty 9f svifih a wltng^x, .Bftf
th^re is a> thir^ .caserf>bic)i, isi tjie. Cft^, o^ Jijljr., Clutterbu*?]^ 8ppk.cn tp^.by. W;fMo(^fy
Thaf-gf^nOemattjiad ^^^a* ;o3^erio&p j'^ s^^ 8^^

of ietanusf Ms only cpmCor^.-w^, Ea^^ ,ii^.Iw|)3 raMeftj ^.ttow% J^^^
cpnl^ and to entovp»r^pe^u^^^,^^i^ry ftaf, % facjof: (;r9p>;,^ fc^vj^ h^^ J^
neck, Tuhbed. proved, ^^^thl^..^^,M^ fromj 9J?-jf(^a,,firoy:^,,r s^^^m^^

hat, the dwhon^ft^ ^, m^?^^}}¥^ffM i^*m«^i?ft9 imM^^^vmi WFTM/^

^J^tenCQ. .. K ,. < . f ;,, «.4ni^ >rt> imj-'t la.^ti iit'iu simMbijua— ^.'ini .i.dj vioi

, But tiien ttMBy,go,.f4i1i^r,-,a4^,^ g^^was Atte t^^^

wa^hefQi*.thp.p»ra^y«ft.^iSe^.gft^ J^*^ ev^,»»^#«W^ %^.^1^9i^W^..
1^emrqxysmc^me,oa, He ^wft!(9^p£^|^a}s, ft»i(,#^
ihink, bean^ put andJlnstratesA^p^^offteu^^I^ %^»^K^ffi W-^^^^f ^1^
t<;> sw^Qw t)ie pi)ls--Hhe,fi9rt,of iljftYfgl^tiW^ mnst.^ve^j^^ j^ce mijaiste head
and iaeck for ike purpose-Hthat 'ijgoffi^^t^.^ Wiigs p^. ,^ejTipi^jjtp^ro;y^j?pQ..^which he
died. So far £rom .that in. t^e slightfist ^g^ i^Ut^tmg^^^gain^ the. Supposition that
1iiis_wasa.cas(^of,pm?»niag by ^t^y<J}uua^ it.^,W°ffc^ ^ ^^

»^% .then .they ^|p j]^,,jto^,jhfi^.fipp,ea:ranc£|..^n^ dea^th^ a^d they say that there are

206- TRIAL OF WILLIAM PALMER.

dpenmstBDces to bo foimd wkidh militate- agaiint this being a ease aittryt^uaa. poisoniog.
Loft BO seeirlnU liiey are. In tho tot yteca^ llMjr aay tbo* iiarite Ht cam o ^9gA ^Aerat
the time of death or immediately af tor, and that ought not to be fbund in a ea» of
totanvt fkwm stt^haia. Mr* NimaelBy saifM, * I* all easoa ^vpoii'-wMtii t hate experi-
mented I hate round the trnmala heeome flafcid? Miovo'dealk,Ml^l|ley'do>iioe'beeome
agaia rind after it." 1 oan hanUy heliffve thai fllvMment^ aad I aertilniy' wait not a fittte
SBfvnfied when the yerv next witoofls vho- got hMo the booa (Bfin fiteftroaCh, of Brisid)
tola ns he had made two expenmonts' v^em m$B, aBd^kiHoA tiiem horn. H6 deseribed
them as '* indurated and c^mtocttd," l^ose^were- his e ayc m i a n a iriieB* befooiid diem
some hoars afler deaA. The eroiei^ o< nudity in the bo^ 4tr or immedhitely after
death here is put forward on the part of Bi9» N«Bi»diey aetone of tiie groobdg upon whkh
he says this was not a death by atfychai% although Dn Tayttr had told-ns that in the
case of one of the eats he killed the rigidity aA^ dealh waa eneh that upon teftiBg; the
animal by the hind legs and holdiiig it np in the aiiv the body maintainett its hotizontal
nataral position^ as though the animal had;been«Bpoiir kafoor leg» npon ai^ane sarfsce.
Notwithstanding that ovidenee, Mr. Nonneley had the- audacity to say tftat he did not
b^ere this was a case of poisoning bv stryohnia» beorittsej there had been rigidily of the
limbft-rbecanse the &et were ^storted, the handa denehei, and the mindes rigid «s ^
mihappy man exhibited pri^Mr to his death. The Tsry nesft w itnes s eaHed vepOA the otiier
^e prodneed two instaaoee in which the animals were indavaled ftom one end- of their
bodies to the other. As he says they were contorted is aH their limbs, and' so ther
xemained, it shows what you are to th^k of the honesty of tins sort of eTidenoe, in^ wMeh
Acts are selected beeanse they make m ihToar of the partbnlap hypothesis Of the pflct^
who brings them forward.

Then the next thing that is said is that the heart in tiiis case' was empty; In the
aQzmals Mr. I<Ianneley and Dr. Letheby hare operated upon I think tike heart has been
fonnd fall. I do not think that applies to all the cases ; I think they male some excep-
tions ; and^ as I said in the outset, it is a remarkable ihet connected with the history of
this particular poison, that you never can rely upon the precise form or order i^bich the
symptoms before death and the appearances after it will assume. There are only certain
preat leading marked characteristic features — ^the collateral incidents are capable of
infinite variety. We have here the main marked characteristic featores, and we have,
what is more, collateral incidents similar to the cases in which the adminibtration of
strychnia and the fiict that death was caused by it are beyond the possibility of dispnte.
In the very evidence which has been adduced of two'cases of poisomng, Mrs. Smyth's and
the Glasigow girl, in both l&e heart had been found compressed and emptied ; and it is
obvious to any one who reflects for a single moment- that the question whether the heart
shall be foupa congested or the lungs congested must depend upon tiie immediate canse
of death, and we know that in cases of tetanus death ma^ resah item, more than one
cause. All the musclea< of the body are subject to the exciting action of lids powerftti
poison, but no one ca^ tell in what order those muscles will be aflbcted^ or where the
poisonous influence w91 put fortti the folness of its powev. If it act upon 1^ respiratoiy
muscles, and arrest the play of the lungs and with it the breathing of atmospheric
2aXt the result will be that the heart will be left full ; but if some spasm seizes on the
hea|t, contracting it and expelling from it the blood that it contains, and so produces
deat]^, why, the result will be that the heart will be found empty and Uie other vessels
gocged with bloods So that you have never perftct certainty ajl) to how those symptoms
will manifest themselves after death ; but that is again put forward as if the fhct of the
heart having been found empty is a conclusive foct against death harving in this case
taken place from strychnih.. Yet those mefi who came here to* make those statements as
witnesses under the sanction of scientific authority, most have heard both those cases
miken to by the medical gentlemen who eaeamined those two nnfortonate patients alter
death, and who told us that in both cases the heart was found emptjr. That gets rid of
fhsX matter. And so again with regard to the congestion of* the bnon and' other vessels,
the same observation implies. If instead of being killed bv the. action of the poison
nj^on the respiratory muscles or by its action upon the heart, death is liie result of a long
series of paroxysms exhausting the vital power of the victim, then you expect to find the
biain and other vessels coi^ested by those series of convulsions and spasms. As death
takes place from one or other of those causes, so will be the appesranoe of the heart, the
brain, and the body after death. There i& nothing, I say, in thiis for a single moment to
liegative the conclusion which you would oAerwise arrive at from the symptoms wbicft
appeared in this man's body at the time of his death and immediately^ afterwards— Aat
those are the symptoms of tetanus of the strongest and most aggravated* kind ; that is ft
proposition about whidi, I think, you can entertain no doubt. If so, are they referable to
tetanus of iany o1iie» Ascription F Gertaihly not; became, as %: Benjamin Brodie tola

TENTH DAY, Mat 24, 1856. 287

fyouy lite 60«M» of iStte-tywtlpt&m v BMirk«d fi^ «ftttvaetM9(Sc8 of ittiqnegtiofiable dififer-

Jb it Bet thesi ppopoaleroar io oantttid tUfti-tliib wn not b case «f tetanus ? And if

^* 'a^ery one of the dieonctioDyi- thef halve atttttnpted ti» set up I show yon to have .reallr

^ '^'oboUmig to do with •the eaA (because I^^fodnee jxm at once an tmdonbted case in idiidi

-" \he administraiion of Atryehmais heyondf the reach of ^nestion, in whioh those particnlar

■' ^'-S3uiiptoDB6 aod afipearaBoes were maaifefinl and otass^ed), I get rid at once of all those

"* '*vain»' fmtile atteraptfr'te^dialni^sh'this' cate, eittier in- its premonitory symptoms or in

-"^Ihe apfeanmees e&tlMr- hflANW or upon post4noifem exsnsination. I get nd of all those

<'*'diffioufties, and I come* hade to the ay i top t em s whioll' Attended this tmhappy man's demise.

y "I ask irheih«r youeaai'doatlt that^ when I have* eveltlded all tfiose cases of' tetanic con-

■ ' 'vaiBioofl, epil^y, and araohnitis, or angina pebtori^ which oceoired, yon recollect, in a

> oi^TOWig pxi after afr attack of scarlet f&fer^^iti all hnman probability the scarlet fever

■ 1 mAsii' iwn thrown haek open the system, and had prodnced au those consequences — ^when

r rf^l exctode all those cases, and tiien lastily exclade thmmatic or idiopathic tetanus, what

r-**-nremains? The tetanus of strychnia, and the tetanns^ of str^ishnia only. I pray your

- ^'attention to the* eases of whieh e r id eac e has been given, in irhich there was no question as

«#to aUrychnia having been aiohnhiistered, there not beinj^ the ^adcrr of a doubt about it,

' ^31 and in whioh the cirottastances were so similar, and the symptoms so mialogons, that I

,M <ff' think you cwmo^ hesitate to come to the conelnsion that this was deaui by strychnia.

^, • ^Medioid witneasea of the highest anthority, both on* the part of the Crown and on me part

^^-{'otthe defence, agree that in the whote range of their experience and knowledge they

\^ know of no natural disease to which these remarkable symptoms can be referred. If that

be 80, and there is a known poison that will produce them, how strong, how cogent, how

^19 -irresistible becomes the inference that to that poison, and to that poison alone^ are those

J « sjympUmis and tiiis denA to be ascribed t

.,.7 ^Nevertheless, p^sntlemen, on the otiter hand, the case is not without its difficulties;
.^. r: - and I will not shrmk from the discussion of them, nor firom the candid recognition of those
J < ' difficultieB, so far as they in reality exist Strychnia was not ft>und in this body ; and
p.«; we have it no doubt upon strong evidence, tliat in a variety of experiments which have
',. ,, , been tried upon the bodies of ammals killed by strychnia, strychnia has been detected by
.^. the teats which seience places at the disposition of sciendfie men. If strydinia had been
\. found, of course there would have been no difficulty, and we diould have had none of
''J . the ingenious theories which gentlemen fh)m a vacriety of parts have been brought fbr-
]\., ward to propound in this Court. The question for your consideration is, w^hemer tiie
^ HLbseuce of its detec^n leads conclusively to the view that tiiis death could not hare
,. - been caused by the administration of that poison. Now, in the first place, under what
... circumstances was the examination made of which Dr. Taylor and Dr. Kees have spoken?
^ ", They tell yon that when the- stomach of this man was brought to them for the purpose
. of smaiysis, it iras presented to them under Ae most unftivourable circumstances. "Aiey
Bay that its contents had been lost, and that they had no opportunity of experimenting
,^ npon them. It is very true that those who put up the jar make a statement somewhat
different. Tbey say that the contents of the stomach were- emptied into the jar, but
there appears at all events (I will not put it higher than accident), by accident, to have
been some spillin? of the contents; and there is, Itiiink,tike clearest and most unde-
niable evidence or verv considerable bungling in the way in which the stomach iras cut,
and the way in which it was emptied into the jar. It was cut from end to end, says Dr.
Taylor. It was tied up at both ends ; it had been turned inside out into the contents of
the intestines, and* lay there in a mass of feculent matter, and was therefore in a eon-
^ dition the most unsatisfiictory for analysis and experiment. It is very true that the wit-
^ neases upon the other ride— Mr. Nunneley, Mr. Herapath, and Dr. Letheby — say that,
no matter how contaminated or how mixed with impurities, ^ey should have been able
to ascertain tiie presence of strychnia in the stomach, if strychnia ever had been there. I
', own I should have more confidence in the testimony of those witnesses if their partialitv
and partisanship had not been so much marked' as they are. I should have more confi-
dence in the testimony of Mr. Herapath, if he Imd not been constrained to admit to me a
fiiet which had come to my knowledge, that he has again and min asserted that this case
vras a case of poisoning by strychnine, but that Dr. Taylor had not known how to find it
out : he admits that that is a statement he has again ana again made.

Mr* Serjeaat 8hee, — It was in the newspapers^ he said.

Mr. JitorMy-<?«nera/.-p^He did not venture to say that the newspaperstatement in any
way diflteied ficom the fiut whioh he admitted in ti^ oeoit. I have seen that gentlioiaa
not merely contenting hSmaelf with coming forward, when'oalled upon fov the purpose of
Jostios^ to< state thai wliieh he knew as a matter of aeienoe or of experiment, but I have

T 2

268 TIOAL OF WILLIAM PALMER.

seen bim miziiig himself op as a thoroughgoing partitaii in this ease,- adtiilngi«ykBBitd-
fiiend, suggesting question upon question, and that in behalf of a mas Whoid he batagsis
and again assert^ be beUered to be a poisoner by strychnine. I do notsay Aal alttitithe
^t ; but I do say that it induces one to look at the credit of those 'wHnwon wiik a wtaf
great amount of sui|>icion. I revereace a man who, ttom a sense of justifse-vad a iove i
truth — &om those high considerations which fbrm the nbblest iskfttMnaU In the^ohaiactsr
of man — comes forward in favour of a m^in against w^om the world m^-ioan'inm tetRat
of prejudice and aversion* ai^d who stiulds and states what he b^ie^es'to baithetnitk;
but I abhor the traffic in testimony to which I regret to saym^n t>f 'sc$flswci osmntiists
permit themselves to co^des^e^d. I ask you t^ereftire to look at the atatismeiitaof thsie
witnesses with dispassionate consideration before ytm attach ImpKeit «r«dittothe». Bnl
let me assume that all they say is true, that it is the fact l9iat they in their' expsiimeDii
have succeeded in discovering strychnia when mixed with dther ittp«uities,micksontBaii*
nated, no matter by what cau3e, — they say that no, extent of putrefaetftsn, no^amnmitof
decomposition, will alter the character of that vegetable matter, so tbat-itinayaatbc
detected if it is in the human stomach. Be it 90. ,Bnt then must it alfrays befDandis
every case whese d^ath has ensued ? Professor Taylor says no ; and he saysit w oal d bet
most dangerous and mischievous proposition to assert that that must aeoessaiily be »^
that it would enable jpiany a gunty man to escape who, by administering the. smsUttt
quantity whereby life can be affected and destroyed, might by that msans prevent the
possibility of the detection of the poison in the stomach of the iadlvldaaL AH thewitr-
nesses seem to agree in this, or at all events the great bulk of them agvee in this, ihattbe
poison acts aCter.lt has been absorbed into the system; taken up by the absorbents ol ike
stomach) It is carried into the blood ; passiug by means of the circulation thfoagb ike
tissues^ it is deposited there ; at some stage or other of its progress it affects the nemN*
system ; and as soon as the nerves, affecting the muscles of motion, bacoue iaflasnsMi bjr
its baneful powev, then come on those muscular spasms and convulsions of wUch wa hsine
heard so muclu If the minimum dose be given, and that operates by abserptioot it i^
perfectly clear — and must be clear — that the whole must be taken up by absorbeatf sod
"pass into the b)pod,. and that none therefore will be found in the stomach. KsjT, a
further prcjHtsitlon is aKo clear. If it is necessary that it should be first passed by rneam
of the cll^culation into the solid tissues of the body, before it acts upon the nervous s^^^?
it will cease to be found in the blood. Again, a portion of it, if in excess, viU ^
eliminated in the kidneys, and pass off in watery secretion. You do not know, therefore, in
. what port of the human body to put your hand upon it. But this is imdoubtedly theise^ if
ther^ has bees, an ^cess over the quantity neccBOsary to destroy tho hfe of a psiticulsr
' individual, then, as soon as the absorbents have taken up the necessary quantit^) th^
neifvouA system will at once be afrected and life destroyed ; you will find the excessiP the
^ stomach* if you adopt the proper means of seeking for it. Now whMdid these gentlemen
do? They gave pevor less than a grain — often as much as two grains; and yet we jm>^
'. know that a quarter of a grain is enough to destroy a small animal like a- rabbit, asd
that no man could, venture to hope for life who took half a grain or tbreS'^usrterflofA
> gradn of it Therefore in the cases of their experiments, and experiments made, allow me
-.iQ say, for the purpose of this cause, after those parties had been retained*^ use the vord
.** retained," for it is the appropriate word ; no parties can be more thovoughgoiiig Pf"^'*
>«SSiDs than sciei^ti^: men who have once taken up a' case-rafter ihey have be^n retained
M for. tbis case, and desire that their experiments should have a etrtain result, th^ twee
fgoodnCjare to have doses large enough to leave a small portion in the stomach. But be
• itbip 4^ U may, I. h»ye. only now to deal with the experiments of Ptofessor layhw and l^'*
f. -^eesri theyw^yi for aught I know, be a pair of bunglers t it is no part of mybB«in««^^J
.uphojld. t;hem.i^, A^V* professional reputation will not do it ; btit they tell us tbat thsy toea
' itp.(eirei9ts.up0Jr^ fp;ir. animals of the same species with fnlly adequate doses. Where my
\ I 4tdminifter^,t^Q,g^2Mni8 they reproduced the poison in^ abundance f whore they^dmiJ"^*

4erfid one ,gi%Vl^ thpy.;(bun4 a.siQttll indication of it ; and when they a<bnhiistered be^
r grain to t^^^jTabbi^ they found no traces of the polson^at all. It may wefl be th** *"*.
jB^y result,, ;as Mr. Herapath says, from Professor Taylor* not knowing the right .^-j
going abo^t it. .. It ^ay be, if Mr. Herapathhad had thestomach under his more ^^^
manipulation h^ ,wp^ld haive pro4uced me strychnia. It is enough for my p«rp®®*.*\^!J
as I show, the. .xofijo, whp. 4}^ in this case experiment upon the stomaoh of Mr. Cook, lo
cases out of foujc when he ^ad given a smaller dos6 to rabbits failed to reprodoce
poison. What is the conclusion I dlfaw fi-Ota it? Why, that although I cannot ^Tfugj
advantage here/which the positive detection of the strydhUia would haveafford^d if t»^^
been found, there is no room for the opposite c<mclttsion--4lie converse ef the f^'^Z^.u
for which my learned friend and his witnesses eontend^that the fa^t ^^"^^^7\\it
fiot having been reproduced or discovered affords negative conclusive proof tbat

TENTH DAT* Mat 24^ 1856. 289

death was oot produced by strychnia. I nave no po^tiy^^rbof on the one hand, bnt od
thanrtMr^^3tiyi4afBf^4 ^te^4 i'ii'^ the 3a«ie predicament — he cannot say that he has
Jsag^WitvptoofiiKimlimve o£ th^ fact of this death not having tiken place by strychnia.
"^*BB*iiDH;i»<;j|j!M»,»oo<iier. evidence in the case? Do t ask you to come to the con-
otnriDB ikftt h»ii4 TO?»i st6i:ed ^tijqhnla to h;s /rien(|,' simply because the symptoms of that
iriendfbrdtoftlii «ee. reoon/cUabJe ;f,}ih .no,^<i9wn.form of disease which the most enlarged
eoqiBrieiloe. ir. I kwfKj^ge tiMip., supply !^\.,iro^ ^entlemenj \t does not rest there.- Nol
beeaoM tiw^is^fmfUti^m^ pjiff c^y,;b4p^e whiph show themseWes hi ca^s of poisohin^
by itryohBicd v,2^tp,vthe/9a84,dQ^ jf^oi^^i thqre 3 . T wish it did. But alas ! it does not. I
I'noW'dfMrjyiiuv.BCffiig^a^e^tion to.a,partof the case;w^ not been met, and

hasfiiot'beaniPBipp^ed wilihij .,My^lef^7^edj&a9^4'8*i^-'ihl^t he M^ould' contest the ground

5»ot^by fojoLj^Ji^&s} we are. ubyn ^hat ground upon which,
wera^njft^cnt«M4: ^he odsis > otf tbjs J^iv^in^ntous questipn':' and. klas^l my Ic^imed fHend

huiOat-gtmppU^^wiUx it for an instant. . »*^e have here a death of which the dread mani^
festa tioM ^ laorei wp<m- their faoe th^ character, o^ strychnia poisoning. Was the prisoner
fttf lAie l^arpttSQflised of .that poison.? Did he ohtain it upon the, ev^ of the death into which
meiaxm InqtkingP. These are matteirs of fearful mpmenl.' ' Thev' are matters with which
it' hMmfied'tiy learned friend indeed to have grappled with' alt the vigour of which he
wa» cflpable and with aU the means that his case a^orded. ' Btit T'grieve to say that this part
tif* like: ease is left UB4«ou«hed as regards the defence. Did the prisoner at the bar obtidh
piiDfcdttBsian pfstryehnia on the Monday late? Did he 'get it again upon the Tuesday
iti<iniiiig'?/The-&ct of his having got it on the Sronday night rests, it is true, tzpon the evi*
dtoiseof -mi individual whose statement, as I said to you in the onset, and as I repeat now,^
'Vi^Hirvff at yoitt hands the most careful and anxious attention before you adofit it easily.
9lewtMkteUs ufl that on,that night when Mr. Palmer came back fro^ London, he came to
^^ilm and olbtained from him three grains of the poison of which, ^u^osing it %ad been
lUiiBinlBteieed, the symptoms and eSect both in life and death Would nare been precisely
tiie same as'tibose which have been described in Cook's caie. Is K^ton 'speakiiigthe
<irtU;h) or is he not? It is open to observation — I said so froixl the beginning, atid my
ieamed friend has done no more than reiterate the warning I gave you' — it is, I 'Siiy,'op«n
to ae^oua observation, that Newton never made that statement until the day preVioiits Ito
tbe oonmencttment of the trial. He has explained to you the realsons "which' iudtlced his
-aileiioe. > His employer had been for a long time upon unpleasant teim^s with Phlm^ri
Th«>y^UBg man, who knew him, however, and who appears to have been more or less
ttpcon ftmiliar terms with him, did not hesitate to give him the three g'ralns of strychnia.
' PnliEtCT was a medical man, and strychnia is often used by medical men. There -Was
nothing extraordinary therefore at that time of night, when chemists' shops might be- ^x*
peeled to be shut up, that, upon Mr. Palmer's coming to him for three grains of Strychnia,
, iie gttve them to him, and probably thought little more about it. But when afterwairds
tbequeationoftbie mode, by which this m^n's life had been taken away 'became rif4» in
Rngeley, and suspicions Jirosa of strychnia, and Roberts came forward and said tVhit u^n
the Tuesday m<)«iing Mr. Palmer had bought strychnia of him, and this 3'^iig ' man was
ealled to GoaSmtt the oircumstance of Mr. Palmer's having been at th^ shop, he h'eard that
this qneatioa of- stirychnine was, involved, and it began to occur to him that ' it wi^ht
serioTisly inrplieate him with his employer, might cast even the shadow of dotibt and -sus-
pieion upon himself, if he came forward and voluntarily stated that he had supplied Paliher
witk'tiie poison the. night before. Then he locked this secret in his breast. Bnt when
the eve of the trial came> and he knew that he was to be subjected to exafiiiMttion h«re,
he felt a sort of oppressipn at having this secret locked up in his breaiit, and he volbn-
talily calne forward. a»d made the statement which he has repeated here. ' ft is for you to
»y whfether you are satisfied with that explanation^ , If; is unquestion&bly true thsJk it
dtitnMts firom the otheirwise perfect credibility which would attach to his statement. "But
then, gentlemen,, on the other hand, there is a consideration which I cannot fkW to press
aponyou^ What possible conct^ivable motive can this young dianhlave, e:]ccept a sense/ of
truth, for coming forward to m^e this statement ? My leai^ned' fr^nd, with ^jtusticeand
^th propilety, has asked for your roost attentive cohsidertitioli ^o thV (q[uesrtioh"6f mftttves
bi:vt>lrcd in this case. Before you can chaise a nu^n with having tak^^ awaf the lif^ of
another by aforethought and deliberate malice, it does become' impoitant' to- siere' v^h^ther
there weore motives that could operate upon him to do so foul a d^ed. ' That 'does not apply
to this witneM, for, even though the hideous crime of takii\g ti^e by po$sota is not perhaps
1K> horrible to contemplate as the notion of judicial murder enlbcted'by'fltlseW'ittitess against
' a nMU&'s neighbour, can you suppose that this youog man can have ihe remotest shadow
of a'motive for ooming forward upon this occasion,, under the solemn sanction of an oath,.
■ ina«oart of justice like this, to take away the life^for alas ! if you believe his evidence,.
si must take. away the life— rof ;the prisoner at the bai;? If you ^elieVe that on the night

290 Ti:iAL OF. WILjtIAM J*.^LM£K.

of Monday, for bo other fionceivable or assigoable pnrpose except the deed of daEksess
which was to be done that iiigbt upon the person of Mr. Cook, the prisoner at the "bar
went to Kewton and obtained from him the fatal and deadly instrument whereby life vas
to be destroyed, it is impossible that you can come to any other conchision than that the
prisoner is guilty, and that your verdict must pronounce him ^o.

What says my learned friend ? He says that N'ewton does not speak the truth : firsts
because he did not come forward till the last minute ; and, secondly, because he lays the
time of his, communication with the prisoner, and affording him the str^'chnia, at 9 o'clock,
and the prisoner waa not in Rugeley until 10. ^

How, inihe first place, I must remark upon this' that the young man does not say
9 o'clock. He saya, "about 9," and ereiy one knows how easy it is to make a mis-
take as to time with reference to half an hour or three quarters of an hour, or evea
an honr, when your attention is not till perhaps a' week or a fortnight or three weeks
afterwards called to a particular circumstance. A man may be sitting working in his
Btudy or his surgery, and have no clock before him, and have nothing particular to impress
upon his mind the precise hour of time at which a certain transaction took place ; and to
Miy afterwards, when he comes to speak to it under the sanction of aa oath, that because
he makes some slight difference as to the time therefore he must be taken to be speaking
untruly, appears to my mind a most untenable and unsatisfactory argument. It is due to
my learned friend to say that he has sought to meet this part of the case. He has pro-
duced to-day a witness of whom all I can say is this, that I implore you, for the sake
of justice, not to allow the man who stands at the bar to be prejudiced by the evidence
of that most discreditable and unworthy witness who has been called to-day on his
behalf. I say that not to one word wMch that man has uttered will you attach the
slightest value. Before I come to him, however, I must make this remark, — that, if
Kewton eould not be mistaken as to the time, how is it possible that the prisoner could
be mistaken as to tfhe time? Yet he clearly was. He told Dr. Bamford (and we hare
it from Br. Bamford himself) the next morning that he visited Cook between 9 and 10
o'clock the night before. And now there comes a witness who tells us that it was a quarter
past 10 that he had with him alighted from the car that brought them from Stafibrd, and
he could not till after that have gone to visit Cook. My learned friend reminds me that
it was 10 minutes past 10. Then he had to go to Cook. One of the maidservants, Xayi^
Barnes, like every other witness, may be mistaken ; but she asserts that on that night,
the Monday evening, Mr. Palmer came to the hotel and went to see ^Ir. Cook before
9 o'clock. It is clear that she must have been mistaken. It is clear that he could not haTS
been there much before 10. I am told that they get over in about an hour. There was ft
cprriage waiting for him, and he would come over to Eugeley with as much rapidity as he
could, which would not be before 10 o'clock. As to the fact of the witness pretending
iSxat he saw him alight from the car,. and that he went to Cook and stayed a certain tim^
ao as to cover the whole evening, I ask you not tobelJ£ve a single word, and 1 do so because
in my heart I do not believe a single word of it.

It is a remarkable fkct which has not escaped your attention, t dare say, that my leemea
iHend did not dpen a single word of the testimony that he was going to call. He said he
lloped and thought he should be able to cover that whole period at Eugeley, Did he teu
us what the witness was going to prove, that Jeremiah Smith had been upstairs in the
ipn, and seen by some of the people at the Inn going upstairs to Cook's room? No, he did
not. If he had we should have had plenty of time between thisit and this to ascertain hoV
tSie fact stood, and I beUeve have been ready to meet Mr, Jeremiah Smith with contradio*
toiy evidence. It was wellito follow that course when J^tx were uncertain whatyo^
witness would say, or what your case might be, because y^ou. njight be met and confronted
by contradictory evidence. " I need not sav that any evidence would haye been better
uian the evidence of that miserable man whom We saw exhibited to-day. Such a spectacle
I never' saw in my recollection in a court of justice. He calls himself a member of the
legal profession. I blush for it to number such a main upon its roll There wag not one
that heard him to-day that was not satisfied that that man came here to tell a false tale.
^ere cannot t?e a man who is not iconyimjecl' that he has been mixed up in many a villany
which if no^ perpetrated had been attempted to be perpetrated in that quarter, and he
comes now to save, if he can, the life of his companion a'nd his friend— the aon of the
woman with whom he has had that intimacy which he sought to-day in vain to disguise. I
say, when you look at the whole of those circumstances.; balance the evidence on both sides,
and look a^ the qujestion of whet'her Newton can by possibility have any motive for coming
here to give evidence which must be fatal to a man who, if that evidence be not true, he
must believe to be an innocent one : when you see that he can have no motive for such *
purpose — to suppose that he would do so without a motive is to suppose human nature in
its worst and most repulsive fojrm to be one hundred times 'more wicked and perverse than

TENTH VAT, Mat H 1856. 29}

j^xperience ever yet haa found i^t — ^I-cimiiot bat submit to jou HitAjoxi ought to b«U0«e
that eyidexuje, and I cannot but submit to you delereoiially^ but at the same time fiam^
and emphatioallj, that if you do believe that evidence it is conclusiye d the case.

But it does not stop there. On the morrow of that day we have the clearest and moit
ttfiquestioned eyidenqe that Mr. Pawner bought more stryohnitte. £Le went to Mr. H*ww
Jiins^s sbopi and there .purchased six grains , more, and the .circumstances attending that
piurchase are peculiar in the extreme. . He comes to the shop, and he gives an ardor Hor
pruasic acid, and, having got his iprussic acid, he gives an order for st^ehnia. Before the
stqrcimiais put up, ;^49Wton. the svqcie.m«i^ ^^mes into the shop. Wliat does the priswMir
do? He immediately takes Xfewtoq, by th^ anyx* a^daays he haa something particnkr io
^ «ay to him, and takes him to the door, Whfit was it he had to say to him ? Was it aii^
thing particular ? Was it ai^ihiog of th9 slightest impprtanoe ? Was it aqythiiig tfa«t
might not have been said in the presei^e of Roberts, who was pitting up the stryohaiaP
Certainly not. It yfoa to ask a mosti^nimpprtant ^u/estion, namely, when young Mr« Salt was
going to the farm^hlch he had taken at Sudbury* In t^t quesstion th^re could be nothing
which might not be j>ut in the presence, of anybody, no mattccr who« He takes him to the
door, and then puts this question. At the same time a majgi.of the name of Brassingtdn,
a cooper, comes up, and Brassington had something to say to Newton Hpon businesi^
having some bills against Newten's employer, Mr. Salt. Upon that BrasBhigton and
3>(ewton get into oonversation at some little distance from the.dpor. The prisoner iaome-
diately takes advantage of those two being in conversation, and he go«s back and eompleten
the purchase of the strychnia* But while the strychnia was b^iingsiade up he stands Im
the doorway with his back to the shop^ and his face to the street, where he would have a
perfect command of the persons of Newton and Brassington^ and itrh^oe, if Kewton had
quitted Brassington to return into the shqp, the prisoner would at onc^ have been in a
position to take every possible step for not letting Newton go in, by renewing the convef«>
aation with him until the strychnia had been taken away. I ask^on, haying this desorip**
tion of the transaction given to you by Roberts in the first place, confirmed h0r NewtoK
,%fterward8, can you entertain ai\y reasonable doubt that the prisoner was desirous ^i not
letting Newton know that he was purchasing strychnia there ? Ton cfm veiy well under-
stand that he would be desirous of keeping that £sct from Newto^, because, if it be trae
that Newton had let him have three grains the night before, Newton's attention would be
naturally immediately aroused by so strange a circumstance, because nine grains of
Strychnia were enough — three grains were enough — ^to kill threei perhi^ six people.
What cocsld a man want with nine grains of strychnia in so short a s^^aee of time ^ }t
would attract Newton's attention, and it did ; for Newton immediately went and asked
what he wanted there, his attention beii^g in the first place directed not so much to what
he had come to purchase as to the singularity of his coming there at all, because for tw^
years past the prisoner never bought an article iof any sort or kin^ at the shc^p of Mr^
Hawkins. His former assistant, Mr. Thirlby,had two years before set up in business as Ak
dtiemist, and fro^m that time, naturally enough, Mr. Palmer bed withd^awjoi his, <^^stott^ firoat
Mr. Hawkins, and had given it to his former assistant, Mr* Thirlby* It yfim a remarkably
thing that he should go to Mr. Hawkins's shop upon this occasion to gpt strychnitk. Why
did he not go to Mr. Thirlby ? I will tell you. Mr. Thirlby would have knpwn perfe^t]^
trell that he could have no l«)gitimate use for such an aartiole. Mr. Thirlby had %Bk»n hik
practice. Mr. Palmer was no longer in practice, except in the circle, of. hlfi relatives and-
his own imnaediate friends ; and if he had gone to Mr. Thirlby for strychnia, Ms* Thirlby^
would have said, naturally enough^ *^ What are you going to do with it^" and therefproha^
did not go to Mr. Thirlby. Why he should have gpi^e to pvo^ohasQ strychnia (I agree, Tvjtth
my learned friend it is pne of the mysterips of this casa) on >two successive, dliys I camiplk
tell ; but that he did is undeniably true ; and if on 1ih0 pAe hftnd. son^e little difflcuUgr
arises, on th« other hand is not ,the di£^ouUy infinitely greater in ^CQiintii^ £pr tha^
motive that induced him to go and get this stzychnia either on the Monday ni^.t.p^ upon
the Tuesday ? If it was for the purpose of professional use fot th^e bpi^e^ at somq patient
for whc»n small doses of strychnia might hs^e been advantageous,, wbe^e ia the patipa|
' and why is he not produced ? My learned friend did not even adver^^to ihjb que^tioa eC
the second purchase of strychnia ha the wl^ole of his poweri^ul phservationa. He patsseait
over in n^ysterious but significant silence. Accpunt for that six gqapis pf i^tryphnia, the
purchase of which is an undoubted and indisputable fact. Throw doubt if ypu please^I
blame you not for it*^upon the story of the puroliasp on the previpp^a tiight ; but on itaa
Tuesday it is unquestionably trtie that six grains of strychnia were purchased. iPurchased
for whom ? purchased for what ? If for any ^adent, whp is that patient? Produce hiSk
If for any other 'pnrpose, at least let us have it explained. Haa there been the slightest
shadow o^aa attempt at explanation ? Alas I I grieve to say, none at all. Something wM
SAid, xn^the oat&et of this case, about some dogsUiat had been troableiome ia thepliddodks

292 TltlAL M -wOsUMl^ ^J&IiUBR.

wbero the mttres Mid Ibab •«raM,'l>«ttlMt>N9*«a to'teM talsifat infis^Ato.oiI^MtietaA
1>e«n any reeurtcnoe of •nch a tHing; wlMris' ar«r the i|;r<ott» ^^O'lMir^lKireaie'^aBidDcbu^
of those mares and ItOals, and why are fbey dtft h0f« *to* stal^ ^htt'fiiet ^ t a# thtoa^io^iui'tMi
Vied ixjr the purpose of desl^6y»g dogs, SMM <MI« «iiiit hat«^«i^t0drlfrdPalink»t'hitlft
attempts wMch he i«9orted to <bp'tli^]^iiiifioML^ Wbei«'«iw«hiife't>4tMkir^' "Wkf fli«ithi^
sot called ? But, not only a»e th«y no«' 'citle#;'«hey are 'boK «*TOtt' liafflMt. /My leimM
friend does not venture to br«a«h« «««n^ia'9ihgM«ti^ 4tf aspp^faigiof ifae kind; fiik,
gentlemen, what eon^laiiiori osi4 we 'ifkmitam' ihUMf IftAngt, eaott)t*'«^,<^Hi&iofic done?
Death, with all the symptoms of «t^«haii[i>:i->-id«iilhi|tf ^ tlM «Simwv« igoaliapaod tl»o«
which that fhtal poison -prod«iee«'kf 'ti|e^friM« '«fd*ui^dealii>with vfi^tUe 's^peamnces
which follow npon deaA; and taa<k ' low tbAt-deatb' hi» ^oawi'to^pasin dltttssetkjngiy fti
the mibds of tho«e who can dilteiiis tod' coittidisr thenk'wMi 'tMi^ •Aisptfurleniite tfttefitkis,
who do not mix themselVM v^ M- adiTobiMesy ^Artlte&»y' olr^wftbesses, iMdhig te* tot one
conclosion; and then the fkct of the tttryoMa beil^^f'pfirdliasedbylliieiprisodtr^ntbe
morning of the fatal day, if not ^eMained by him, as warswioni to, ^on the'olght beftve, ia
left wholly nneovered and wholly unmet, without th« shadow of « dieiehcei' Alasi' g«BfeU-
men, is it possible that 'Wo eaA edkne t6 any other than one painful and ' dread eonotastou?
I protest I can suggest to yottntotte. ' • ' .. . . r

It is siiid by my learned friehd, '*ft it :likely thai Mr. Palmer should httfe pirdisssi
strychnia at Rugel^ wheui he might have got it in London ?" I admit the iktii. I f^el the
force of the obServatloU. If he could have tthn^n that he had done anything' with tliis
strychnia — if he could have shown* any legitimate purpose to which it was intended to be
applied, and to which it Was afterwards applied — then I should say that it would be sn
argument worthy of your gravest and' most attentive consideration. But jost see* on the
one hand how the fact muy stand. He was in town* on the Monday, and he had tbe irpjKt-
tUnity, as my leaTned' friend suggests, of purohaidng strychnia there. But on tbe otiKr
hhnd he had much to do t he had his train to catch by a certain time ; he had in tie
"mean while his peeania^ embarrassments to solve if he eoald. Time may have iioirti too
fast for him io be able to go and obtain this strychnia ; and even if he had had time, I Ao
ilot believe it is sold in chemists' shops in London without the name of the party puf-
ohasing it as a voucher; If he had given his name, of course .it would have been sttll
worse if he hadf bought stiychnia in London than if he had bought it in Rugeley. I Ao
'hot say that it is not worthy of your consideration, that it is not a difficulty in th« t«^;
but I say there is plain, distinct, positive proof of the purchase of strychnia; and under
circumstances which cannot flail to lead to the condusion that he shrank from the obsermr
tfott of Newton at the time he was buying it ; and there is a total absence of all proof^My;
of an suggestion, of any legitimate purpose to which that fktal poison was to h^, or irss in
point of fiHct, 'aftef!rwards actually applied. • ' ^

' Then, gentlinien, it is said that there ure two other drCntitistaiices in the case vliieh
'mflk^ strongly in fbrvoUr of the prisoner, and negative Ihe'presuaBption of a g^^
intention, and these are, the fact that be called in two mediod vum. Here agadn I tdnnt
that this is a matter to "which all due donsidersitlon ought to be given. IH called in Dr.
'Slunfbrd'oin thd Saturday, and he wrote to Mr. Jonefi en tbe Sunday, and desired ins
j^resenee to attend his sick friend. It is per^etly true that he did.* It ia perfectly troe,
'tts uiledital men, they would be likely tcy know the symptonttttfpolMiiing by strychnia,
'ftbd 'they would be likely to suspect that d^ath hiMi' ensued l^m it ; and yet even here it
HtKkes me' that there is a singular inconsisteney in 'the ^eftuue. See the strange
«6iitrtid}«titm in which the witnesses called fbr tiie defttuec iovolve my learned diend
Who |mts them forwaird, if all those sys&ptoms 'irefre net the i^ynrntoms i)ff strychnia. I'
Ihey Ar^ referable to Idl the multiform variety (of- diieiis^ to ^hich ''Oicne witnesses bare
ipekekl, w^ then ^euld Mr. I^almer 'have- the 'dredit* of having selected medieal nun
tfho would be- likely to kuow ihmi 'tho»e-isyiiip(»ms that thiey were symptoms of
itrythnia ? ' <l ^a 4bat by ; if ifr hot a'iMttMf of very much iihponance. It is true tkat
he did have those two medical men. He called! infold' Dr. Bomford. I speak of that
^ntieiuajn in t^nhs of flerfisot respect^ ' biit I iMtik i tdo' him nd Injnatice if I say that the
vigour of his iutell^ lEUid his power 'of obsermtiou have bi^en- impaired, as all hnintn
powers are liable to ble impaited, by the Aiftmnolng hand of tine. I do not tbiz^ he "whs
8 person likely to ttifllfe very shrewd obeep««tlons upon any syhiptoms exhibited to l^
oither immediately alter death; or upon'thl9 subsequent examinaftibn ai the body; floid
the best proof of that "ia to be Anmd it that which he has aetaaJly done aud written
with reference to tUs case. As* regards ;Mr. Jones the sanfe observation does not
apply. He was a young tnan iti ilie fall' possession of his intellect and ,lhe profesnonal
l^owledge which he had acquired. Ndvertheless i^xmt him ihe o/bservatioBS I a°^
about to address to you i thitik aire not unworthy of notice. The priabner at the bar
•elected his men wtett^ fyt 'what haa osKoeitotpaaatheiwa how^risely ho judged of what

nnaWkiAf to 1al» pHMft.-: Tliitf deslh oMmrvBd io tkei)r«ieiic« of Hr. Joii«s, ^th lOI
tkoie ^tmk.'spttftgmB whv^ you haye hfifurd deMitbed; yet Mr, Jones suspected
«othugf ftod if 'Mn Sltfv«AS Ind not eKhildted that sanoity and fimness which he did
nuuMfeat in iher'aHec pwrts .df tiua iranaaietion^ and Q Mr. Palmer had sooceeded in
f^ettiBg tliaf1)ody JbaslUy intvodocedioto thesftiioBg oak ooflin that he had had made for
ikt, -thfl body mmld ha^ beeneonMaed V» ^the arvre, and nobody wonld haye been
tfoght the iTisee. * The prasedoe of 'Mr^^Jon^St^aadTUie prosence of I>r. Bamford, would
not haye ledlo detecl»OB«' ipoidd not bane ^ruatrated xki» dest^DS with which I shall
.presentLy.ooatsnd before ywa this]dealli.iWias!htQUght about.

On tnepotfaer hand, g^emen^.thewatl^iriis perhaps capable of this aspect ; it maj
hare been that a maA^whoaa euflmio^ was* equal to hia boldjueas ma^ have thought it
the beat oowae to adopt. to i«^aid suspicion ^ — to. prevent its possibility — was to take
care ihat*medkaL mea ahould be called in and sbionld be present at the time of death ;
nor is there angrlbing to show that the pHsoaer had^the most distant notion that Mr.

• Jones intended to sleep in this room that flight; and if he had not the man would
Juure been found deiid in the momia^t; he would have gone through his mortal struggle
and intense and fearful agony } he would have died there alone and onbefriended ; he
would hare been found dead the next morning ; the old man would have said it was

•^apoplexy, and the young man ironld have pat it down to epAlepsT. If any one had
whispered a suspiciom, the same argmnent would haye been used which has been used
now with so mach power and force by my learned friend, Can you imagine that
the man would haye called in medical men tx> be. the witnesses of a death which he

^himself was bringing about? But, gentlemen, as I have already said, if you believe

• the evidence of Newton, and if you believe that that same ni^^ht piUs were adminis-
tered to Oook by Palmer, and that, I believe, will be your opinion and conclusion, n6t-

• withstanding that wretched witness to-day said he heard Cook say to Palmer that he
had taken the pills already, because he, Falmer, was late^ whereas the woman witness,
MiUa, told you that the next morning Cook reminded her that his agony was such as
she never could have witnessed in any human being, and he told her he ascribed it
to the pills which Palmer had given him at half-past 10 — if you believe that state-
ment, and that the pills were given him by Palmer at half*past 10, and you find that
Palmer a few short minutes perhaps before went to Newton, and got the poison from
Newton, and you find upon that night the first paroxysms, though not so violent and
not fatal, yet similar and analogous in character to those which preceded the death, can
you doubt on tiie first night the poison was administered to nim ? though with what'
purpose I know not; lean only speculate'; whether it was to bring about by some
minute dose convulsions which should not have the complete character of tetanus, but
would bear a resemblance to natural convulsions which should justify his saying after-
wards that the man had had a fit, and so prepare those who should hear of it on the
next night, when the death was to ensue, for the belief that it was merely a succession
of the same description of fit that he had had before. That is one solption. The other
may be that he attempted on that Monday night to carry out his fell purpose to its foil
extent, but that the poison proved inefficadous. We hear that an adulterated form, oi: at
all events an inferior* form, called bruchsla, is occasionally sold, and it may have been
that it failed in its efieot* It is only onertenth of the strength. We know that he
purchased poison on Tuesday, and that on that night Cook died with all the symptoms
of poison ; and why he purchased that poison is not in any way accounted for. The
mnptoma were the same on the Tuesday ni^ht in character, though greater in degree,
-uan they were on tike M<H¥lay; and ^ere is found a witness who eomcs forward and
sa(fs, with no earthly motive- to tell so foal a falsehood, '* I found the character of tiie
convulsions the two auteeedlng nights the same." I cannot resist the conclusion to
which my seasoning impels me» that poison was, administered upon both nights» though

' il failed upon the ftrat. I cam onl^ speenlate as to what was the oanse of ihilure. There
are the &eti, and you must deal with them« i

Alas ! gentlemsn, it does not itopthek^ : there, is another part of this esse which,
though it majr not have been the meana of deaUi» is of the highest value in estimating
the <sredit that is to be given to the point wjufeh we advance of this death having been
]>roduoed by strychnia — ^I allude to the antimony^ We have nad mescal men and analy-
tical chemists who have tdd us a great deal about strychnia, but not one has said a word
about antimony. On the Wednesday tnght, at ^rewsoucy , when Cook drinks his glass of
brandy-and- water he foneies there la something in it ibat bums his throat; he exclaims
at the time, and he is seized imn^Nliately with vomit^g, which lasts for several hours. On
that same night Mrs. Brookes seea the prisoner shaking something in a glass, evidently dis-
solving something in fluid. A man has been called here to^y, the boon companion, the
ohosen asaooiate^ the facing confederate of thepriaoaer, to comie and tell you tnat all that

294 TRIAL OF WILLIAM PALMEK.

utorr 16 untrue — ^tHat the woman nerer came down stairs — ^tbat Palmer iieyer catrl^ out
Ae brandy-and-water-^lliat there is not a word of truth in it-Han<d the 4aist is that Palmes
and Cook only oame in at 12 o*clook, when Myatt forsooth had^ bee^ waiting for two
hours. Mrs. Brookes's story is, according to him, an entire invention from beginning to-
end ; he swears that he imist have seen if anyt|iing had been mixed with the bcandy-and
water, and nothing was mixed with it. I think you will be more disposed to believe
Mrs. Brookes than to believe an^ of those persons who were the associates of the.prisoner^
and who had been partners in his transactions. It ^s a remarkable fact that Co(m( drinks
that brandy-and-water and a few minutes after is tikken ill, . lliere were other persons
taken ill at Shrewsbury; it may be within the verge of pqs^ibilily — althou^ ten minutes
after he had drunk the brandy -and-water he was ta£en with vomitipg — ^that it waa
the same form of complaint to which other p^sons if ere subject ip Shrewsbury : I do
not want to press it one jot further than it ought to gc, but it is a remarkable circum-
stance that the man is seen with a glass and with a fluid which he is mixinff up and
holding to the light, aqd shortly afterwards, his friend who is drinking with him or
drinking at the same ta\ke at which he is drinking, who, if Myat( be telling the truth*
was somewhat in liquor and ought not to have been pressed to take brandy-and-w^^ter-^
Palmer says that he will not take anything until Cook has exhausted his porUon^-mi^
tilien immediately afterwards the man is taken ill. These are circumstances not alto-
gether incapable of j)roducing certain impressions upon one which it is difficult to
shake off.

Nevertheless, I pass on. from th^t, and gq to Bugeley. From the Saturday moz^oiqg
until the Monday mondng I £nd this poor man suffering under the influence of constaiit
vomiting; that was not the Shrewsbury disease — he had got rid of it; he was Tvell
on Thursday and he was well on Friday. On Saturday morning:, after dining at Mr. ,
Palmer's, he is taken lU ; and then we Iiave the fact of Mr. Palmer administering lus
food, administering his remedies, sending over toast^aad- water, sending over broth ; a^d»
no sooner has this poor man taken those things than he is seised with incessant vomitings
of the most painfiil description. What about the broUi? The broth is siud to-day by
Smith to have been sent from the Albion. Yes ; and where does it find its way to ? £(
is taken, not to the Talbot Ajtns, but to the prisoner's kitchen. After that, instead of
Lsaving it, as one would suppose he would leave it, to the woman to take to the Talbot
Arms, he takes it himself irom the Are, puts it into the cup, gives it to her, it is taken
over, and the man vomits immediately after he has drunk it. On the Sunday the same
i2ung is done again ; the broth is brought from the same quarter, and attended with ihe
same results. Of that broth the woman takes a couple of spoonfuls, and she is sick ibr
several liours. She vomits twenty times, and is unable to leanre her bed for some hours.
My learned friend said she did not state that before the coroner. Nevertheless, it is
sworn to by the other servant that the woman was ill. 1 can.qtute understand why tbe
woman did not state it before the coroner. It shows the honesty of the woman's sba-
racter. Jx did not occur to her to connect the sitkness from wl^ch ^e suffered with tbA
taking of the broth ; but afterwards, when the story of the antimony came up, and Cook's
sickness was connected with it, then she remembered perfectly well, after ^e evidenoe
had been given, how she, having taken the Inroth, immediately became ill. The £ftct is
not one capable of dispute, although it may be that she did not mention it before the
coroner. And I tbixik you will regard it as a very important and significant fact in tbe
case, that, on the Monday when Palmer is absent. Cook is better. On the Tuesday he
vomits again, though not in the same degree. But after death — ^now comes the im,pov(aat
£u;tr-^antimony is £>und in the tassues of that man^s body, and his blood shows the pre^
sence of it; the blood shows distinctly that it must have been taken recently, within tho
last eight-and-f!arty hours previously to his death. How came it there? The small
(jjuanti^ that is found does not form the slightest criterion of the quantity that had been
adxninistered to him. Part of it, you know, would be thrown np by the act of vomcitin|r
which it provokes j ^art of it would pass awav in other forms, but none would be Ihere
unless he had taken some. When did he take it? If you find that he is suffern^ from
vomiting for days 1;>efore liis death — that n person is constantly administering thiiiffs to
him, and after taking those thix\gs he vpmits-^when the prisoner sends lum orver a basin
of broth he vomits, and when tire servant takes ' a couple of spoonfuls she is x«-
dnced to the same condition — what other conclusion can you come to, knowix^ that
antimony is an irritant that will produce vomitixxg and Tet^diing in the human
^stem, than that the antimony must have been administered to him by some one ?
By whom? Who but the prisoner at the bar could have done it? My learned
firaend says. Cook might have taken antimony at some former time--4hat he might
have taken James's powder for a cold. There is not the slightest trace of evidence
trom the beginning to the end of the case that he ever had a oold^ or «ver tool:

JESTu l\k~ii ^^^^ ^ lib56^

James's povdfTj owr die vkoiejieTiod ve are nnmnfij^ Modboxvi; as I ka^«t
DOW said, it was li: b3s liloo^ u rnnsi baxe Lem admimsMi>ed c^khaskd-Sam- booKbdvopt
death I wlko coml bare adminartg-T^^ it let iLe pnsooet at the bar ? I »l^x« t» Ibraa
your own jadgmenl npoBi ibai matter, but I cacnoi lesast tbe cdhdcaoB, it is irresasdble.
If so, for what poipose was it adnunistered ; it is difficTiIt ta say widi anviliiB^ Iskit pne»
dsion ; one can ozJ j SKcnlale upon it. It zDay ba^e beea, bowercr, to pnodxice tb*
appearanoe of catnial (iispaspj to accoimt for tbe calling inof medicaTmen, axd to acoouft
for the catastrophe whidi was already In preparation ; bnt it ma^ also have bad another
and a different object, and it is this : if we are right as to the moOTes which iniAelled d«
prisoner at the bar to eonunit this great crime, it «as» al all eroits in part, that he m^gbt
possess himself of the money which Cook would haTe to reaHae npcm the settling-day at
Tattersall's, on Monday. If Cook went there himself the scb^ne was frustrated; 1^
Cook intended to go there hlmseli^ and if be bad done so the prisoner*s deȤns wimld
haTC &i]ed of accomplishment. To make him ill at Shrewsburr — to get bim in oonso*>
qutoce to ^o to Bngeley, instead of going to London cr anywhere else — to make bim ill
again and keep him lU at Bn^ey, might he part of a <^eTerly contriTed and organ-
i2ed scheme. It might haTe been with one or other of those motixes, it m^t hawt
been with both, fhat tbe antimony was admimptered, and so sickness produced* bat
that the dckness was produced and that tbe antimony was afterwards found in th*
body are incapable of di^mte. Put tiiem together and you have cause and effect 9 and if
you are satisfied that antim<Miy was introduced into tiiat poor man'*s body for tbe purpoM
of producing yomiting and ockness, then I say tibere is no one who oould haye gty^a
it to him wiSiin that recent period but the prisoner at the bar. ^ Nether the doctor at
^rewshury nor tiie doctor at Bogeley eyer ^ye him one fraction of antimony which
had those natural effects which as a cause it was certain to produce : then it will he
for you to a& youreelyes whether it can haye been witii any other than a foil purpose
and design — ^with a yiew of paying the way for the more important act wlach was
afterwards to foBow.

biy learned friend has dealt with fhis case of antimony m no other w^ tiian that
which I haye suggested, namely, casting out some loose, floating, ima^nary notion that
at some period or other, for which no precise date is giyen. he may haye taken James's
powder lor tiie purpose of getting rid of a cold. Alas T ^ntlemen, I feel that so idle an
objection cannot stand between you and the concluaon which^ I suhmit to yoiL, arises from
the fact that this antimony was fi;iyen to Mr, Cook with a wicked de&i^. If it was, just
see tile important influence which it exercises upon the other <^uestaon. If antimony
-was found — if anfimony can haye been giyen with no legitimate ol^ect, and if it can
only haye been giyen by tiie prisoner at the bar — how great 4o*» it render the pro-
bability tiiat to carry out tiie purpose, whateyer it may he, that he had in his nund*
he gaye him this strychnia, of which the deadly effects and consequences haye beett
but too phtinly made manifest.

Then, gentlemen, let us take the conduct of the prisoner into consideration in tbe
after stages of the case, and also in one remarkable particular — ^in an incident that took
place on the day of the death, on the evening of the preparation of the pills — and in lus
conduct taken in all its circumstances I fear you wul nndi)ut too cogent proofs of his
glint. 1 be^ with the Tuesday, tiie day of the deatii. Mr. Cook had tad what eveiy
one win admit to haye been a most severe fit on the ni^ht before. Dr* Bamford conies
upon tiie Tuesday, but not a word is ss^ to him about it. He comes, and the prisoner
is solicitous that he sh^ not see Cook ; and twice in the course of that mornings wheA
<Jd Mr. Bamford is desirous of coming up to see the man, the prisoner swd, ** He is •
tranquil and dozing; I wish him not to be disturbed." That may have been innocent
T)ttt on the other hand, if Dr. Bamford had come at that time when the fit was fresh i&
Cook's mind, the probability is great that Cook would have tdd him what had happened
the "night before. Cook does not see him till 7 o'clock, when Mr. Jones had arrived.
One would have expected that, having bepn invited to come by the prisoner, the first
thing Mr. Palmer would have done would have been to mention how ne found him the
night before. He talks of nothinff but a^out the "bilious symptoms— biFious at Shi-ew^
l)ury, bilious to Dr. Bamford, and bilious to Mr. Jones ; and thus he is represented
throughout by the prisoner at the bar, yet all this time the medical men agree in saying
that there was not a bilious symptom about bim from beginmntf to end j no feverish
skin, no loaded tpngue, and none of the concomitants of a biuo^i/i condition,^ The
moment Mr. Jones
under a bilious
only answer he „ .,
■saw him at Shrewsbury, or wb^n Br. Bamford saw him, they both found his tongue
perfectiy clea^ ; the irritetiQn jai the bowels was not the result of natural action, but of

296 TBH^ 9? Wlf^U^^.F^^i^.

the antimony; and not one f
taken place the night be^re
men are consulting at the ~

dead of the night Thej gointo ^'^0i|iri^iS&^^^^

be done. The man h'ad!^ deciartid .Mft^

Mr. Palmer immediately plroposefel 'i!fi^t

night before. He says ^ Mi'; JdniasL' " ^^ ^^. ^^ — . .-^ ^^^, — ,, ^..^..^

strong objection to them.**" it fs aiShfr^tt tti' ' ha^'tlW jpiBi Mffe Hm-; M'dofes nof ^ra!|

to have the pills sent by Dr. BSim^rd:*tfl6iitli'!t#a8'eai^4h';ttt^ eveflinfe^

panies Dr. ftimford down to' 'h'*-----^-^' .9r_i.>ii...i«^fia...fi3X .* ^."^^-i-.i

Dr. Bamford should havd ina(

own close by, and lie could' 1^ ^ ♦ w '

well their contents; itistead^"6f wh!ch he goes ddwn witk Dn Bkmford to his sttijery^.
One would have supposed 'It would hi^ve beeii dmte enough, as he was the J>erson iflid
every night administered the pills to'^obt, \{ Dr. Bamfbrd put the pill^ in a boot ahl
handed them over to Mr. Palmer,' who knfe^ what was to be doie with thenl,' Instead of
which Mr. Palmer asks Dr. Bamfofd' to write the direction. He does write the direc-
tion, and then Mr. J'alm^t' yalks atVay ^ith the pills. Axx interval occurs of an hour or
two, during which' tiitie he had aii abundant opportunity of going home to his surgerf
and doing what he pleased in the way of substituting other pills. He comes back, and
before he gives the pills he takes care to call the attention of Mr. Jones, who mi
piipsent, to the remarkable hand-writing of the old gentleman, Dr. Bamford, as beii^
worthy of attetition in a man of his advanced age. What necessity was there fcraS
that ? Was not it, think yon, part of a scheme, Uiat in case there should afterwards I«
any question as to the cause of this man's death, or the possibility of his having liad
poison administered to him, he should be able to say to Mr. Jones, " Why, you know
they were' Dr. Bamford's pilld. You were present at the bedside of the deceased, jou
saw that I administered nothing except pills, and you must be clear they were Pr. Jto-
ford'fe pills. Did not I show you the address written, and call your attention to the
excellence of the hand-writing ?" Who knows but all that prevented the possihijHty of
suspicion being excited and presenting itself to the mind of Mr. Jones.

Now any one of those circumstances in itself would not be such as I could ventore
to submit to you ,as conclusive of the prisoner's guilt, but I ask your attention to a series
of things following one upon the other, which, at the same time, are of a most remwk-
ahle character, and, taken as a whole, lead but to one conclusibn. The death having
'taken place (I am passing over for a moment other jcircumst&ndes which have no reference

' to the immediate cause of death, I shall come back to'them in anothei* part of the case),
We iftnd the fkther-in-Iaw comes down to Rugeley upon the Friday. ' Let us see v^jiat
the conduct of the prisoner is then. The father-m-law applies to him for infbnnalion
on the subject of his stepson's aflSairs. I pass thatovier: because th^t, too. Will come under

' a different head ; but having done so, tod it apj^anng fi'Om ttife representation whicli
the father-in-law tnade that tixe man had died in comparative poverty, something is said
about his being buried. «* Well." says Mr. 'Stevens, "rich or p6ot, pooi" fellow, he mtxst
'te buried." Mr. Palmer immediately feys. " If thW is all, I Win bury him myself ,

;'** 1^0." sayg the stepfather, and the brother mterjwses. ' Mr. Stevens days, **No, I am !«*

.Stepftither and his executor, and it is my place' to btirv him.* Well, there is noAin«in

all that. Palmer may have said, with regard' to his friend,' thit he would see the last

. respect paid to Ms ihemory. But ther^ is this pemiartaible^ thita^/when the stepfeder
says that libbody shall bury hlih but himself, knd makes the observjation that periiaps it

' will' be inconv^eiient to the pi?ople at the inn to' havci him' lying there for two or three

, days, because he^nfehded tb have him bnri(Jd in town',' so that the poor man might Be

Vin the same ^Vfe 4ith His mother-J-imMediat^N- lifter this Palmer says, "There willlje
ho harm in that, he^'caJfi stajr «ts ibibfeas yon like,' bhtthe body ought to be patina
coffin imniediat^ly." ' Aftfei* thaf'Mr.'Stevfeii'^etS' into <potiVersation with Dr. Bamford
About his syn-in-mw:; aiid whlW they «te In febiivfersation Mr. Palmer slips away, gj««
out into the towii, and' tomes 'back m 'aboift IfcQf ai hour, when Mr. Stevens asks tm
for the name of Soti!^ ^ndertjflcer, tt' wief thfcir'he may go and give the undertaker
directions about the funeral, and he findi to his surprise that Mt. Palmer has gone oat,
and has himself, without any authority, ordered a shell and a stk^ng oak coffin, in omer

that the body may be immediateljr put away. This, ajnun, is a circumstance not un-
worthy of conaderation. Why i(hoiud he interfere and meddle in a mutter which did
not concern him, and whibh it waSs iSb^ buBiness'atld province of ilnother man to attend to,

TESTH DA V, Wat ^ii, MS^ 297

«p?^.t tih^> that be. hfjl qiade .19 lug mi«d that Cbat ))ock skoiold I19 oonslgiied to its last
rjestwg-place and remoyed fix>m the sight of man with as much rapidi^ as circum-
Sjl^cp iro«Id pennit off . Tou hay^ h^aifd what tool^ place in the oonrse of conTersation
^f^pctfu tbc^ subj^t of th9 beal^g-'hooJlf;. . I ^a^ Uiat'hj. ^r the present
., < J noir. come to Saturday, ivh;^, ^j^irn^ irom.IiQndon,.Mr. Stevens and Mr. Palmer
Pf^t In <he,r^lwiaij tiiufly apd l^^e di^erent statiox^ when the Uain stopped had con.
rersations with ope ^mother; i^^it a{9>edred.atthai['tj|9ieMr, StCYenahad folly made up
^ii9mdto,haTe.the bk>ay examined^ jtWe .were, .circumstances which had engendered
sn^icio^kinmsmind; hejb^iie^ i&e aUitpde,<^f th^.,c9rpse; he had scten the clenched
hax)^^ aad, bein^g, a ma^ oi sa^ncity j^nd. shrcnfrdnesji ijipon putting things together,
thexe. wa^ a. lurking, suspicion^ jiis Jgnnd thatne coi^d not. oyercome, and he was
determined that he Voufd-be fiat]j90e4»,and ^e n^ade known his intention of having the
Bod]^ examined before it was CfHua^ned to the. grave, tt is due to Mr. Palmer to sajr
that he did not flinch fi-om the tiding ordeal, of Mr; Stevens's scrutinizing glance when
h^ .mentioned the subject of post-morten^ examination.; .he makes no objection to the
post-mortem exmination ; he is . anxious to iu»w who . sl^U perform it, but Mr.
p^Tcns will not inform him of the fact. . It is to take place, a^d it is appointed to take
plakce on the MondaVf . On the Sunday we have that remarkable conversation to which
JNewtou speaks* and which has been in the possession of the Crown (it is not, like the other
part of hisevidenc^ brought forward at the last moment) and in the possession of my
teamed Mend. It is true he did not state it before the coroner, bi;t the explanation is ex-
tremely easy. Before the coroner, Boberts was the man who came forwaid to prove the
pi^chase of sUychnia, and vouched Newton being there, , Kewton. was. immediately
fetched, and his deposition will be found immediately following that of Bot>erts ; not
ibr the purpose of giving a general statement, but for the purpose of corroborating
^berts, which he does. Hence it came to pass, in answering, only the questions
which were put to him hj the coroner, nothing was said upon the subject of that
Sunday's conversation, hut it was given immediatley afterwards to the Crown.

I think you will not believe that Newton coqies forward for the. purpose of ms(king a
false representation as to this conversation. What was the conversation ? Ae is sent Tor
by Mr. Palmer to his house, and he is treated with a ^lass of brandy-and-water, and
when he has a glass of brandy-and-water they get mto general conversation^ and
then, I think, theprisoner says, ** How much strychnine would you give if you wanted
to kill a dog? ' Why, I should give from half a grain to a grain. Would you expect to
£nd any appearances in the stomach after death ? No ; inflammation or erosion, but no
appearances," Upon which a sort of half-uttered ejaculation comea from the prisoner,
'* That is all ri^ht," and a sort of action of the hands. Was that entirely an invention?
Was nothing said about a do^ ? Was nothing said about strychnia? Now it may bate
proceeded from two cau£^, if you believe the conversation. It may have b^en, that
t^Q prisoner w^s in a s^ate of great anxiety when he found this post-mortejn exami-
nation was to take place., and he was anxious to know whether the views of another
medical man conflrmed his own with, regard, to the ^pearances in the body after 4eath,
where death had }^een. occasioned by strychnia. It may have been that he med^ totted
some trickery, som^ i^^S^^t ithat involved ,the real des^uction of a ,dog, which may
have given rise to those i^uestions which .wej>e suggested ^n the part of .the defence to
one. of the witnesses wl^o Vere. called ; it maji: have been that something w|is in con-
templation to des^Qy or attempt to destroy a, dog, to account for the purchase of the
strychnia, which he knew was lik/^y to. be broufi^t up in evidence against hipa, lu^d
i^hich it would be a difll^uU pdatter to expla|;i. , Whether any such a.ttempt wa^ jUtcfr-
wards made I know not;, I imagine<^, tbat we i^ere goi^g to have some evidence to,th^t
efltect, from the questions that v^e a^ed, bi^jt, np SHph.eyid^ce J|^a8,.be€;n aflbrded— not
the slightest as to what purpose this quantity of s^cbnia has becA applied* ^ b^
Bot been found upon the prisoner'i^ pi;en3i9e^.< What ha^ beconjte ot it?. X.cftD^iot solve
precisely the secret of that copyeTSjatiiO;!^^, . JJki^ mny pther, j^fittef?, if> .tjbis. case,, it
remains a mystery; but tbifSjIknow»,lfica^^^o9ka,t,iit in pfi aspect,^ which, it does. iM>t
reflect light upon the.guil|; in whi<)h this.^tT$UD«acti9n is involyed; if ypu ca^ solve tbe
^i^culty, for heaven's sake dp^ but I C2^i,^ugges^ to yo^.^o SQlutjiQn..,.From that man,
Newton, then, he got his strychnia ^ on ti^ !l^nda)r night, and fo^ ,]that i^an ,he sends on
the Sunday^ With that man he^ holds a 1 con,^ersation-7:^as ,it wijtb the view of leading
Newton to believe that it was fpr the purpoS^e of ^lU^g a dpg he had got it? These
axfi speculations and surmises, into wbich X do not d^iai it necessary further to go. It
will be for you to say whether you can entertain any doubt upon all these facts, when
they are before you, thf^t this death was occasioned by strychnia, and that that strychnia
was administered by the prisoner, either from what; lie. obtained upon the Monday night,
or from that which, beyond the possibility of question^ he obtained upon the Tuesday,

398: TRTAl m Hl^tLlAM PALlJkEft.

Ibr wUeh &« Im filled! to acdotitit^ and fdrwHcli Indeed He^h^ ^QjC att^W to

Ba« then 017- teamed friend' mys tha<t't11e man h^d no inotive to take away tHe life
of his friend, and it is right we should see how that matter stand?. Gentlemen, if indeed
I have satisfied you, beyond the reach of reasonahle doiibt, hy the evidence I have
addnced, and. brthe failnre on the pat^ of the evidence Ibrthe defence to neutralise its
effect, that the death here was occasioned by fetfychnik-r^hat the strychnia ayold hav^
l^n administef ed by no one, and in fact tras adjninistefed by no on^; save Mr* Palmer--
Ihe qfiestiicm of motive becomes a matter of secondary consideration. It is often difficult
to dive into the breasts of men, to nndei^tand the motives l^t have been workin^^ tliere»
snd by those motives to account for their actions. Omniscience alone can exercise that
ftculty and that power; and therefbre, where acts are proved against a man beyond
the reach of reasonable doubt, it is not becaujte we may not be ^ble to exercise a suffi-
ciently sctntiBising power to ascertain the motive^ that we are to doubt the facta, the
existence Off which is brought beyond the reach of reasonable doubt; but nevertheless it
10 always an important element in a case, and it i^ above all an important element in a
ease upon wh$dl' any reasonable doubt can by possibility rest, to see whether there 'was
aa adequate motive to lead to the perpetration of the act which is chained. On the other
hand, genHemen, we must not be too precise in weighing ^e question of the adequacy
of motive; tiiat which, to the good, would appear of no influence, however rmote or
minute, in induohig them to commit crime, o&entimes, with the wicked, b quite suffix-
oient to impel them into crime, and it may have been so here.

Bat let us see, befbi^e I make any further observations upon that point, how the
matter stands upoii the proof which is befbre us. I told you that Mr. Palmer was a man
1ft circumstances of the direst embarrassment, with ruin actually staring him in the face,
aad' that nolJdng could avert that ruin save pecuniary means ait once obtained fbr lus
purpose. The p*oof which I have offered to you has f\illy come up to the proposition
with which I started. The ftict has becai proved beyond the possibility of doubt. It
appears that in the month of November, 1855, Mr. Palmer was in this position. He owed
upon bills, all of which were forged,' the sum of 19,0002. ; he had bills to the amount of
12^,500/. standing in the hands of Mr. Pratt ; he had bills to the amount of 65007. standing
in Ihe hands of Mr. Wright ; and he had a bill for 2000?. in the hands of Mr. Padwick.
Although it is tr^ie that 1000/. upon that account had been paid off to Mr. Pratt, yet the
b^Is still remained for the fiiU amount in Mr. Pratt's hands. Although 1000/. had been
paid- to Mr. Padwick, he held a warrant of attorney and a bill of sale upon the studfor the
lanaining l-OOO/: All those bills, without exception, were forgeries. A correspondence
took place between Mr. Phitt and himself with regard to the 13,000/. policy upon Ins
broth^'s death, througn which he hoped to liquidate Mr. Phittfs demand; he had been
disappointed of that money, and upon the ofi&ce declining to pay the money, as early as
the middle ofOctober, Mr. Phitt gave him to understand, in the most distinct and positive
terms, that riie bills must be met. Bills for 4000/. were due, or were coming due, at the
end of tliat month: one upon the 25th for 2000/., and another upon the 27th for 2000f
B8ls already renewed were coming due from month to month, and there was 5500/. which
it was necessary immediately to provide for. Mr. Pratt gave him notice that he could
giVe him no longer delay, inasmuch as the office had resolved to dispute this policy. It
was no longer an existing valid security, and consequently Mr. Pratt could not be a par^
to representing to his clients, with whose money those bills had been discounted, that it
was in any respect a valid security, therefore the bills must be met.

The matter was coming to a crisis ; the bills must be paid at maturity ; he sends
him up three small sums, first a sum of 300/., and then tiro sums of 250/. each, making
the sum <s( 800/. Of that sum 200/. was to come off other bills to fall due in January,
leaving only G007. applicable to the principal. He is told at once that he must do a
great deal more ; he is told, late in bctober, that unless he does a great deal more
writs will be issued against his mother and against himself, which would at once bring
the matter to a termination by showing that those bills were ^i^eries. He entreats
that time shall be given ; he obtains diis concession fhqm Mr. Pratt, that the wntJ
flhaU not be served until a given day, and he in the interval must ma&e ftnrther V^V^^
on account Of the principal bill due. That being the state ot things upon the 13th, Mf»
Pyatt writes and presses him %t further payment^ On that day rolestar won. Coo*
was, as you have heard, in sm extasy of delight, feeling that his difllcnlties were, w
all events for a time^ removed ; that he should' now get through Ae winter and live
happily till Ae- next racing season. He little thought what wae about to take pla<»-

his accusation is weU fimnded, the mare winning, and his being entitled' to a larg®

of money, was the most fatal thing that could have befallen him. Alas I now

is the luiortsightedness of mortal man I When we have the highest cause of joy

TEItTH day; M^t H> 1366. fn

and exnltatioD^ often while tiie mmflhine of our prosperitj irtnnt and gladdens our
htarC fbf' a momeht, tlkere is larking beneath our feet a fktal abyss, into whieh we ave
about to fall. T'his poor man, if this charge be true, mi^ht hare been living now,
had H not been that npon that f&tal day his mare won, 9j3. he became entitl^ to a
large snm of money^ which afforded temp'tation to his murderer.

jffow it becomes perfectly cle^r that at this moment matters were approaching to an
immediate crisis. Wnat was iMTr. Palmer to do ? He had no source to which to tarn for
money. It is clear that he conld not go to his mother. I presume that sonroe had long
nnce been exhausted, or he would not have forged her name. What was he to do if he
could not get money to satisfy Piatt^s demand ? Tou know, although a money-lender
is considerate and indulgent enough as long as he is certun of his payment, and gets
Mb heavy usurious interest paid dowp to tbie^ nul, if he once becomes doubdfUl of the
aecurity, and uncertain of payment,^ you may as well ask mercy of a rabid lager, or
you may as well ask pity of stones, afi nope to find bowels of compassion in him. Pratt
gave him fkir warning that the money must be paid^ or somethingmnst be paid by way
o^ instalment on the principal, and to keep the interest down. Where was Iifr. Palmer
to get money iVom ? My learned fHend says Cook was bis best friend, and that Cook
was the man he was to look to ; and that as long as he kept Cook alive he had a friend
n need to whom he could resort for assistance. In what way ? Was Cook to give
acceptances to Pratt? Is anybody weak enough to suppose that Pratt would
have taken Cook's acceptances to keep those bills alive, unless there was a
part payment of' the pnncipal and interest? It is quite clear that he wonld
not. When even for the sum of 5002. he was asked ^ to^ take Cook's security, he
vefhaed to do so, unless there was the collateral security of an assignment of his
horses. Cbok had assigned to him all the property he possessed. All tnat Cook had
in tile worid was his winnings upon that day s race at Shrewsbury, and what little money
he may have obtained by ms winnings at the races at Worcester, If you believe the
witness Myatt, those winnings were e:)uiausted, and therefore this man haa nothing except
his- winnings at the Shrewsbury races; and you are asked by my learned fiiend to believe
l&at it would have been of use to Palmer to keep this man alive ; the reverse is proved 1^
the evidence. With Pratt his personal security would have been unavailing. Pratt telfi
you that he would not take any&ing from him unless it was the real security of an assien*
ment of his horses or other property. Just see the interest which PfUmer had in securing
all Cook's effects. My learned friend saya they were mixed up together in transactions
In which they had a joint and common interest — they were confederates upon the turf, and
had joint bets together. Yes ; but one man putting another on does not mean that when
A. puts B. on and says we are likely to make a good thing, and we will share it, that B. is
to pay A.'s losings if they do not win. They mi^ht be confederates on Ihe turf, but that
did not make Cook responsible for Palmer's liabilities. Does any one suppose tiiat Cook
intended to find the means to enable Palmer to meet Pratt's insatiable demands, to stave
otf the difficulties in that quarter ?'~ Was Cook to deprive himself of his winnings, and
leave himself without money, fbr the benefit of his fnend ? That is the proposition, for
the whole of which my learned fHend must contend before you befbre he can establish
anything like a case to show that if Cook had lived it would have been better for Palmer
than tiiat he should die. My learned friend says there is proof that they were mixed up
closely together to be found in this, that Cook writes to his agent Fisher and says to
Fisher, writing on the Friday after he had dined with ^Palmer, " There is a matter which
Is of importance to P^ilmer and to me, that 5002. should be paid to Mr. Pratt to-morrow ;
3002. has been sent down to-night, and t request you will be so good as to |)ay Mk*. Pratt
200?: to-morrow on my account, and charge it to me." My learned friend thought
iStat tiiat transaction would be fiivourable to his client, and he put it proininentiy fbrward.
To my mind he could have adduced nothing more fatal. The explanation of it is to me
as clear as Ae sun at noonday. Cook had brought with him some 6002. or 7002. : at least
at Shrewsbury he was seen by Fisher with a roll of notes amounting to some 7002. or 800/.
On that same evening the parties come to Rugeley, when he had not had time to spend
the money. He speaks or a 5002. transaction, in which he and Palmer have a joint
Interest. There is only that one transaction with Pratt in which they had a common
Interest, that was the 5002, raised by the assignment of Polestar, and a bill, of which
we say Cook never got the proceeds ; and he says, writing on that night to Fisher, '* S002.
have been sent up to-night, and I wUl be obliged to you to pay the oSier 2002. to make up
the whole." No 8002. were ever aent up that night. Mr. Pratt has given an account
of the whole transaction. 9002. were to be sent that night ; by whom were they to
be sent? Can yon doubt? Where is all Cook's money gone? 1 can quite understand
that he handea over 8002. to Palmer to send up to Pratt, and directed Fisher to pay
another 2002. What followed in respect to the joint transaction ? What was t^e joint

muL pr TOjjun,F^j(^

hii mare;
that be n
" 3001. wi

shovs tha
Panae for
■with the c

Pratt on !

Bat th IP>*<)[,

the MoDd fWVi

to Londo] iTMCft^

ti^e^ to I '■.'V?^i

'and the pi ti «Mck

hehadwc i.Fjdw,

wtmld hai . , ... . , . , s #iil«.

pass tTirpu£^.lF^Ker, li^^se be t$kei Cipher to advance the SOOi. upon the credit in ili
bat it is eugg^led that nuderthe guidance of Palmer he nov me^t^ed it. fnnd, m,
that he "intended, to MGs''hU aecoont through Mr. Herring, in fwder to aiotd pa}io('
I^sh^r'th^200l"foraiim.e' .& it charitable to Mr. Cook to aacribe to him sfracd of ''u'
dMcnptioD,'|whlcb, so far as ire know, be va» not in the habit of doing ?' I'tift. joa 'l^-
queEtion as reasonable men, .supposiag he had disposed of his readj mfrney, a»] ve iii
nfine'left-^th^t be had glTen the prisoner 3001 to send up, jou caonot ^iqipose !>*' '^
WanVio had nothing of his fortune left, who sees ruin staring him in the fiwe— h< "^
not a ruiped man of long as he had this money, bul baring parted with Ibis moncj »
ii^e'a mined man — you cannot suppose that he intended to deprive .himself pf the ■^W
o^tbe mpuef. that be bad won, lo lenve himself destiliilc «j)d nak«4 for (he n>ming
Trhi)eri the ttjipgisont of the queEfion; be^des, if the urisoner's jepresentatioa islrw
wEiichlie mpdeio Mr, Cheshire, tbit he had gql the genuine c^enueof this man for "7
nearly the amount, through his agents Me*srs, 'WetSerbj, of tlf atskes at Shrewsbnrj>
jbu are asked to believe on the one hand that be liad giT^u ^W his re^djjmoner, lui^'*
the «her hand that be bad given him a che»e to n^ive ,of ,il'essrs, IVetherby. «
t^t Behad given him 10207. which lonstif ut^^bsojat^ j , the wfio^ tiat the poor m"

Eessed^—joo are asked to biflieve that he Jian(|* H .oyer to, the prisoner to go and "*
of as he preases: that is my learoed f/ien^'s'ptoposiiwi'i^ut'^. pot. think joi""*

'■■'Trhen if that be' not bo, What does.tV prison'«/do.?"ri.e goes io t^inaon, but aoet Mt
^ & Fisher, who was the agent of Cook, who wowd in the first place have paid tiniBCu
bScS flie .20Of., and in the second pliee would not b»vc jid the sums which he r«^™
except upon Cook's anrfiofity aiid jnstrtiotion.hut wouldljave sent the money loCook,*
iave^paid It .upon Cook's, writtm difecliooaa to what was to he done with it. He »*»
tile sccouiiij 'therelbre,.' Jo a cdmparatiTVstranger.whq never bad acted for "f-*^"?*
hefbre,' feeling that ^at ,stiuiger,would hfve no hesilatinn or repognao^ i" pAji^E Y^
nlioney ^cormng to.tbe direction, of the mf from vhoin he had the direclian to Teca<»,
it, snppi^ing that tfeth emanated ^i» jlr. Copk, the person interested in the ■""/''^
Accordingly he" says 'to Mr. Herring, 'f Her^ is a Wt qf bett which Cook wiU be entniw
tobepaidatTattersall's] they are so' iflnch.joti dispose of itin this way ; pay joaisell
2b07.;" itbdngae&ct that Mr. CwkWthe prisoner had before raised ''"ft'
think, of 500/. i 20«.had'been;^i6eai)y,!ir. Coot on bis accentanc* anfl 400i..h»d li™
raised on (he acceptance .of the priscmer, K[r, Cook's wirtion bad been paid aS, bM '^
of the prisoner renuunedoopaid,' Palmer ssjs to Mr. Herring, " Pay jounelf MOi., b"^
go to Pratt's and pay him -iSO/,; •>"■" "" *« P«Jli»i/'lr ^-a >.«ii Titm iFinJ." Kow, it i»
perfectly dear that the 450/. —

thtn go to I^wiok and My hjm 350)>'' Ko*. '^^
i^iicKiij vinu- luBi me »aui. »^s a debt due from Palmer to Pratl^ as^ i^. i» '*"'"'' "j
Cook had anything lo dp with it,. The. debt, ot 350;. Ip Padwick, was,fi(r «w« bet,«»

tti»W0ir;myX'ig»;'" Art'

^hmS^ it i» Wt ]M^y«^l( fi»^e r^on to, i^fy^e 1li»t ftie minor {iut of it was a
debt of Cool^^g, t)|rt fte larger pan Wa^ a debt of Pjiti»er!s upoci a auitter in which they
«tood in t^epxpt. There Is evidei^ that Mr. PaUner treated the d^t dne to Padwick
i« Us, He fatfr * ^ ^Ul |f7 J0« jn; het of 3Sf^, at snch a ti^." I am givinfi: hira
-Qtedh for yha« f M}^^ waf m M. Jl»»« > part of it wm Cook'i. Why wa« Cook'a
«fet>t paid 9ifeij f , 7hfgr«! wa* t^ ifttJa^ot-fiMiQriej in flht hands of Mr. Padwick, and Mr.
iWtriek ynA ^ettfttf :%(ipia{ip^ Ar hift lOdO/., and .if iUU he^ bad not been paid to Mr.
l|i^wick/Mj,T^Wlcl( iifttl^ ]^Te re^^ted/the nonrpaytoent of'tiie debi,bf honour
irhidi he l^'nb Wins ^jnfiircing^.and V€Nild have, come down npon Mr. Pahner, no
4ooM/aVVTfi5r earj4^ tjtWi in^^^pwj df JthelOoo?.. due upon, the hill dishonoured
trelW X^d(i JKf^rf .;", Exactly jStfX ms^ to pns^i n» consequence of Mr. Herring not
woertinith^ jpolc' ofnic money, J^e wm liot jtb!e. I^ |R^y Mr, IMwiak, and the result
nras thittMr. VaAvAc% pat theprpces^of t^ie law. in median agabst the prisoner on that
T«l/an(f>reu^ia!iswQonjag»m^ Ms mother. ,Thebin for 10007. was the bill of Mr.
TlAmOtf uti'on ^hich Mr. Cook was not prin^ly liable, I .say here was a distinct
iikerat ,ii^nich;^he prisoner had ^to appropriate this money to himaelf, because it
^ites the jeans' for t|ie moment, and the only mean^' he coiild resort to, of stavinff
<A tb^ evil hoiir which wa^ iiipidly approaching. The degree of difficulty in which
be mur phic^ must not be i^easured simply 1^ the amount 'of his pecuniary lia-
l|Uitj^Sr , It iras .not merely that h^ baji these large hills upon which at any moment
]frooess might be issued, but he had m^Ae his mother ^swcraUe for those bills, and
the moment ,the tirst of them was put in motion in the Courts the fraud and forgery
wpold cpi^e to light, ;ind he would be exposed not merely to the consequences of his
inability to pi^ his debts, but to the consequences of the Uf which he had violated.
The formei: might have been got rid of in the Insolvent, Court or the Bankruptcy
Court, but the crim^ of forgery could not have been got rid of ; for that he would have
to answer at the bar of a court of criminal justice, and would have incurred the penalty*
of transportation, or of penal servitude in an aggravated form. But there is a further '
aQm besides the 1000/. ; he a^^propriated a fhrther sum of 350/,, which was to be got {roni
Messrs. Wetherby's. It is said that he got a genuine cheque firom Cook to entitle him to <
receive that money^ but it is not for a moment suggested what induced Cook to give it*^
t0 him. Was it a genuine cheque ? That matter might have been solved by its production.
It 14 notproduced ; yet it is quite clear that it was returned to the prisoner's hands by'
Messrs. "Wetherby when they coul(i not get the money. It is qmte clear that it was of
great impollance to him to get the money, because there was 100/. to be paid to Pratt,
which must be paid in order to stave off the evil day upon the bill of 1500/. which was
due on the Otbi of November. Where is that cheque ? If it had been produced we could
have seen whether It was a genuine cheque or not It Is not forthcoming. What are the
circumsl^ces under which he. presents that cheque to Mr. Cheshire? He goes to Mr. '
Cheshire upon the Tuesday, and, having shown the cheque to Mr. Cheshire, he asks Mr.
Cheshire to be so good as to 611 up the body of it. I suppose he saw s(«ne manifestation
of surprise in Mr. Cheshire,, and he 8a,id, ** Cook, poor fellow, is ill, and I am apprehen-'
sive if I fill up the hody of the cheque Wetherbys will know nxy handwriting.*^ Why.
should not they know n^ han^wfitin^g ? What objection was tnere, if the cheque was'

genuine, and if the transaction was ap honest one, to Messrs. Wetherby's knowing that'
ie handwriting was his?' £>oe8 not it pretty plainly Indicate that there was some tVaud
going on which he was afraid n^ight be, detected? Why, in Bea^en's nam«» should he'
send for Cheshire? He had to send for Cheshire from the post-office when Cheshire was
busily engaged in the bosiness of the eve;ning, at seven o'clock in the evening. Just about
that same period, a little before or a tittle aner, as the case may be, he had to meet Dr.
Bamfbrd and Mr. Jones in consultation as to Cook's case. Mr. Jones was his intimate
friend — the trusty friend that came over rfiat afternoon.. If poor Cook intended to give
him the cheque, and was at the same time so ill thajt he could not .'write, why not ht^ve said.
to Mr. Jones, ** Jones, I do not want to bo^er Cbok, to fill up this cheilue, fill it np in^
my favour for 350/., and we will get Cook to sign it." . Why should "bfi send to the post-
office to get Cheshire down to his house, alldffingAt the time ilxaX he was apprehensive
that if he filled it up his own handwriting ihight be known. Does not that transaction^
bear fi-aud upon the face of it ? On the other hand; it may bQ a genuine cheque ; but; I
ask again, where is it? Between the time when these matters- were called in question
and the tiipe when Mr. Palmer was finally aixested^ not upon the criminal but upon the
civil process, which came down unluckily fbr him ' befbi^ the coroner's inquest, which
secured his bodily presence to answer not only the pecuniary matters but these charges,
in the interval he had undisturbed possession of his own papers. From the moment when
that freedom of action and possession cesu^ed, we have traced the possession of the papers;
and it is dear that at the time those papers were tld^en possession of, that cheque was
• u

3f» TRiiffl 09^ WIILliir Pi^lUfiR,

not amotigsttltem; itii'cleirr iftM thie |iH^il«r;l^h6'had')[MfBeMlM>^ft,«1iiiM 18^^^
with it ia soiae maaoer. Wbftt has \h^me tof 'it? ' Ifhj in iiim ^i«6<l«Sed^? ' '^8i'3^
h«lp drawing ibit bfereriee from its tit)n-^rD8ueti<m tlnrt there ^raoid^tliiMerinfli^Miis-
aotion that will not bear ihe light f It is elear that he ittt^iidijd to gisf ipOtseiskiB of^^
SSOiC^ which ought to have b«eii giv^ to X^bok; ujion ftlte fweMIMeft. He^ had^ titit a
£»rthh)ghimM)C^^l^<ii^^^^'t<> 9^ewt(«i^rtM!e» he' h&itt(y0tA ^bl. MVUn
i^owii, a person made a het fbr InfrA^u^ the taoes, aiid, httvittg «iF>on ^00f«< preteed hiirf
f«r the debt, bu< could not get "ariotfa^ ahillin^ treia Mtii. ' I ¥hOw yda thM- he'^totttf'
hook to Rageley, aadis from that moHtent in the poteesstod of dobne^.- Wh4»e (mk He
have got that money ? h is d^t that hie mdst hate got It Mni'Oooli?, who hidi hot ssy
left h^nself ; it is clear that he had a!ll thutttiottey to th^ eiteM of 8S0I.; pr^tohl)f tt^«li
more* and besides that he gets' 1(^2. as the mi6ceeds of ^e heVtin|r at Ta€tei«idl% and he
attempts to get, bnt docs not get, 375?., MrhioH onghi to- have' be^h ;^ai9<inti» V^tssn:
Wetherby's hands. This was tfle tr hoi* of the wtirtfly possessions, thte '^hole s«» Of the
irealthofthis poor ycrang man. ' >.,:;..

But he is not satisfied M^' ^hai^ft is dear that he meditated anothef fhttid of (i
^^erent description. On! the Friday, almost as soon as the breath is out bfthenias^if'
body, he intimates thiat he has a claim upon him for 3000?. or 4000f. in respect ot-MH
which had his (Palmer's) name or* acceptance' upon them, but which in ftct hid beeaf'
negodated for Cook's puntoses. He teHs the same storv to the &'ther^-I&w, but it is tti
clear as the sun at noon-^y that he endeavoured to mbricate an instrument to give a
show of colour to those reprwentations. He goes on the Thursday or the PHday to Mt
Cheshire, and brings to him 2^ document which he asks him to attest, that doeument
bearing the signature ** J. P. Cook.** The man having left the body, and Hving onlyifl
the spirit, eight-and-forty' hours before that siguatUre had been brought to be attested,
who can fail to see that here was some great fVaud and design meditated? What #a8 tie
document? It was a docuittent which purported to be an acknowledgment from €66k that
certfidn large bills which had been negociated were for Cook's benefit, and foi* Cook's benefit
alone, and that he (P^neer) had had no part of the proceeds. No^ there are no such bills
i» existence. We have exhausted the bills pretty well, I think, and none such are proved
to exist; bnt if there be any such bills in existence, who would know it bettci' than
the prisoner at the bar ; be could have no difficulty in satisfying you of the fact, sod of
removing this great stnmblhigblook in the way of his defence ; but he produces' dns
document ; and on the same day, the day that followed this poor man's death, he ▼ntes
to Pratt, and says, ** Mmd, I must have Polestar if it can be arranged.*^ What was tlus
scheme ? Hdving got every shilling of the man's money, his purpose was iq secure the
little property that remained in Polestar, the ralue of which he may perhaps to himself
have considerably exaggerated. The mare had just won, and she might be supposed to
be worth more than she had bera, or he had in view, speculating- at other races to briog
about results of benefit to hhosel^ Further, he may have intended to pay out of Cook's
estate some of those bills, under ^e pretence that Cook had had the money fi)r them.
Ft^r all these purposes, from the beginning to the end, it was necessary that Cook should
be put on one side. Then with this document in his hand he goes to Cheshire, and he
asks Cheshire to attest the signature of a man who wad then de&d. If Che^ire had had
the weakness and wickedness to comply he Would have had him in his power; and the
next thing would have been, that he vrouldhave brought hhn tretabHng and reluctant
into the witness-box of soihe court of justice to strear to the feet that he had seen the
dead man p*t his signature to that pieee of paper. But it may be suggested that aftef
all the document was a genuine one, and thht the signature was not a forgery. Then jtto-
dude it and we can judge. Hete agait f point out, and thete Is no escape firom it, that
the papers of Wie prisoner were in his pos'session till the time of his arrest, and Aey
have been taken care of since then, and are fiere one and all, either to be answered ior
Of produced' la ttus presence, oi* they have b^en handed over to his brother. Who ironW
not fail to notice that this paper has nevfer been found or Asked for? Who cati dOTbt
that that paper brought to Cheshire remained in i^e possession of the prisoner? who
can dolibt that it is either destroyed or is puVpoS^ly withheld? Under these circnm-
Slances who can doubt that in it is to be f6und proof of some meditated act — of sonie v^
design of a fraudulentand flagitious chJaractet", for the fiill completion of whidh the death
of (xK>k was a necessary thing ? "

Now» gentlemen, 1 have gone throu^' that part of the case which relates io tte
motives of the prisoner, and it will be fbr you to sa^ whether you are satisfied thattws
was a death by strj'chnia— that the prisoner was in possession of strychxlia— that he
had access to the dead man's bedside, and that he administered pills to him at' is penoa
short euough to be capable of being connected witii the catastrophe that a^^^'^y^
-ippened ; and it win be for yon to say whether yon da not feid that the state of tmngs

TE»TH D^y^ Maz 24, lfi66, 303

«
willirr«£^q«ft to. p^eoAiai^i mfttters to wbicli I Inav^ beon ^qs| alluding, ia fioffid^at M»
aoooast fbr tl<e apt i^hich is ascnbed jto th« priso^ier.

jBiBi'tliero i&aoqthar part of bift conduct as throwiqig light unon t)^ matter to wIucIl
1 4»imK>t fiul to r^fer. Wl)|^t> ha^ bqcome of Cook's hetting-bpcUL? What has been the
Goi^nct: a^dthe Jaog^ag^ of:th^ prisoner with xeferepce to it^ On the ni^ when
Qodk d|ed,' 'ere the bi:eath^iba4 hardlj pW^ firosi that poQr nan's bod^, the prisoner at
the bspr inw mxnsaagi^ hisrpocliiiets 8^4 searching nno^^ his pilloWf That may haye.
b«^ for « piQrfec|l7 U^itimfite pufpo^e., j^ut let u^^e.what takes place. He calls to
Mr. .Jones and he teUs jiotc. Jo^s that it is his dM% ^ the nearest friend of the dead
mail, to t^ke possession of h?s effecits, and! ^r. Jones does take possession of his watch,
aDdiAJ^enrarcU,^ at' the snga^tion of the.prisone^, <xf h^s. rings. At Uie same time Mr.
J^pA^j^sks for the bettinip-oook. . My lean;ied fifiend e^deayou;*ed to esplain away this
moAta-'wkw^M^d part of the case» by.mying, **'Thpe wei^ ot^r persons who had accesa
tq th^pUw;^ Th(9' imderiak^r came there, with his ^en,,t^e women came to lay out the
dead body, and the servants were there ; any one of those might haye stolen the book.**
But>U this i& met by the fact that, op that sai|^ nighty, befqre the womep had had any-
thing, to do ,in the room— before they came to lay out the corpse — ^before anybody made
their appearance — that- very night, when Mr. Jones ia seeking to. g^th^r up tae effects of
the dead man, he asks for the book. What is the answer ? ** Oh," s^s Palmer^
adopting the language which he afterwards repeated, " the betting->book. will be of no
use to any one." Does anybody doubt in his own mind where that betting-book had
gpneto? The father-in-law came down on the Friday, , and he begins to discourse.
%out the affair, and he is not satisfied with the answers he gets, 'the da^ passes away.
He s$iys to Mr. Jones, " Be so good as to collect my son-in-IaVs betting-jbook dJad papera
and ^ing them away**" Mr. Jones goes upstairs; he is immediately followed by the.
prison^: up they ^ but there is no betting-book to be foxuid. Down comes Mr«
Jones and says to Mr. Stevens, " We cannot find the betting-book." ** |^ot find the*
betting-book I surely you must be mistaken :" and, turning round,, he 'says, '* Why, Mr.
Palmer, how is this r " Upon which Mr. Palmer says, " Oh, the betting-book is of no
use." " No use ! I am the best judge of that. I think it will be of a good deal of use.^ .
The obsenration is again repeated, ** It is of no use." Mr. Stevens said^ " Why ? \
'^ Because a dead man^ bets are void, and because he received the money himself upon,
the course at Shrewsbury," A dead man's bets are void I Yes, that is true ; th^y areC
Yoidyhut not when they have been received in his lifetime. Who received the dead
man's ,bets ? The prisoner at the bar. Who appropriated the proceeds of the dead,
man's bets? The prisoner at the bar. Who was answerable for them? The prisonej;;
at the bar. Who had an interest in concealing the fact that he had received them ? He had.^
What was the best mode of doing it ? The destruction of the betting-book. What wasj
the best mode of calming the determination of the man who was the executor of the deadj
nUui, when he wanted to know what he was entitled to receive and what he had receiyed»„
and to see the record of his pecuniary transactions If Why, to teU him that the record,,
even if found, would be of no use, for a dead man was dot entitled to any belfe, he having)
died before they were. received: yet at that very moment he had receiyed the proceeds r
of the bets which he waa representing as void, and was applying the proceeds to his ow;n^.
purpose. Does not that throw light uppn the real nature of the transaction? Whaij
possible motive could he have for representing that the bets were void, having himse)[f|
received them, unless he knew that he had, received them fraudulenthr and ^<mg;fivny ?
See what would have taken, place if the tnith had come out. Mr. Steven^, if. he had,'^
seen that book, would have seen that his stepr^u was entitle^ to receive t02p/. .Be.
would haye inquired who was his ageni^ to see whether by possibility those debts coutc^
be realised ; he would have learned what everybody knew, qX leajt that potion of the,
tiitfittts with whom Cook was in the habit of co^mmunicating, that tisher^was his agfeuf. j
Fisher would have told him, *' I ought to have, received the money to repaj* myselj'
200/., but Mr. Herring received the money.**,' He would have gone U)' pr. Herring, and|
he would have found that every shilling ^f the money found its ^jg into the prisoner's
pocket, and was appropriated tp his own purpose^^, How was all m» to^b'e done? By,^
the removal of Cook, and then by the destruptibn o^the only record which could hav^'
afforded to hia representative, who was. entitled to staiid .in his place aHid realise his
pecuniary rights, tne information of the money having beeu received. by a wron^-dber, by
a matt who had no right to it. Gentlemen, I submit these things to your consideration,
but I submit them to you as leading tinhappily but to 009 Conclusion, and thi^t , the con-
clusion of the prisoner's guilt.

But, gentlemen, the matter does not even resfhere; there is. more of the prisoner's
condivct yet to be commented uppn, on which 1 must say a few wordd befbre I conclude :
Mr. Stevens determined upon naving a post-mortem examiiiati'on. Let us watch the

• • ' IT 2

TKIAL 0¥ WILLIAM PALMER.
!T in reap4ct~ or A&l most imporlaDt part of tbe history of thi« case.

"Oh uo" B»ys Klfcer, "Mf.t'^\-, nf)„p;^W<Wft «J,ppqnHWi ^».,IBWi„fe^»^«

rtiileptfc flls npon (fie Mm d^y.^Q.^ 5^«to^W)4,rw nr*j^^ ^■■?f **

head and of theliiart.'* Well, there was nb diaea*e fonnd ofthe head m.f>£ thfl.lwtf*.

MlesB that Tery wi^ KMfle^M, wfew

of to-day, was Hglit ab4iii;l!is i(&w,,of,i!«ii^,EPi^9n|„ybictt^

OTnled % tetanic »jm|ifpnlS jnjffil? ^^1$- %Wi^,PPJ 4v>r.mf-m» tbq-||inwrH^,i.O»iW

declare '^—=- -" ■«*■- -^i"^-- ai^Wpf;;-!^* h.;^ .api thp Wt.^ ,,-g>nii^^

™y" ,MRpf|Jiad,Bppe,ti) I|l^.,&iiifw4,,a^»*ed-Oc,

BMnfin tp'f Bwnfara snnl, WturaUy pwngb.i;;' H« is jaob

mtlm^ fdiiroatyfliirrequtBt.' ,"Hn J|y«ild.CT<hPrff*«

flMt , '•'.."^ponleM!" "^e neit dsy,]!>B,telIs.Pj!.HRTliW»4

that It (s'fiot.Aii ordiD^ 4iidi^i4u^, bai, n ia$i^]y.B>m

PUMtt flWfi™ ''"> "^BWd t(0 roeiitBi #»(»» j,>BH«S«,

the pM »cf; before tiny go ,lo it ther^iq toiqe.ooay^natiilB

vltn V Lmoc^'particiiIarTy refer to; ll is sot , WiU^Ktoty,

nordlu whictkyoH-vonld expect lo&idBnim vhowfnmd

kadJQi 1 tiespealuof the exsmiijatitw .tbonttaMkepllvei

tetbft; r. ,Thi; Btomach and its aaattatt Me,,M,w^ nniietr

stood, 1 about bis haiving pushed against the pwfiieB.iWbo

VijJe I 1 tJiink that is canying fhe .putter, top fsF.i: iJUMRJ

lliteDi - , , , look at it in that light; at lut tbe sloniMiIli T«jmf

'nthout tls,^cq'ntei)t^^.aB4' appr^on ofthe intestines, are pat inia a jar, nod- th^ jnr. lb

: it is tied and waledi and theo:lL ia

ion, -with referenee to pt^^.Mrta t*

a Dr. Haitand turDi r^un^Ae StA

ind then at the other end tit..^ UMg

ranee, but a docur .whi|^ led: into a

usage, the priwoor, v»a foynd.l'ith

, be Esys, " I thou^tit wouIB bavc

outj.''. That m^gM Wo Wn his

ip^lhe j«, cqptftjiuijg rte> etamafi

therft TsS«djft enspicion of IwRing

t,i»,ffl^«lli[,.^ii*^tfljr«pe-fowd;in

wb#,q9ft(d hftS«jiB»4« AWB fl«ept
4jj. ,Wf arp lo^ i^ ^pnj^o(ii«^ biji the
li'e.Wf^eEithepwBOKe wad, the
^(l;f(Mu!l)e:JHH3»W,.<rf>J''f<»ld»eia«
*fi peipSWi i<»i«Wt,Hft|y'(ni ; all I
lpyflWW#-i* ^,«g»idotat»gft ot thi

r ^diWssaii*'^ j*Ht is .'eoing »

Sil"Wi:W'fi'^*fl*'i?'MP '•Bttev, wndiM
cfiHfrtd.MWirtl.L'mBt bia«ft,«i9d» »
Wro#f iiwrnpt *'(«.<»iweai>JS *i>o«

»v,ftK.itb«!ff»CF>«l 9f:Us,.coBtCnt»
«BpBi?9tfflelj;.»nnpowt ooBjpl^aioB

»w»f*l*rt»rrisSf aroB^gimpljcmt
Etw(|»4iitaJ«|tet5fe« >n.tl»».iB*(tifp-r
".ffliVUh fny le«fne4 f^lld. sagrfc 1^
vj^ to:ha4jbe^ >trpat«d.il>y the

.*,',il 4,§iaitr.lJioJlIli SWn Jliil PW
jSiW'flWSiWiainBtfWQe^.vhMh.miaa

tfpnS* SHiSSt^lS.' ¥*"*»■««.»*>>■ ">«

WW^JSa^ffl *o,ir^(K;ji-h;l|b*^'iiar
H!V»4Ri.thfe SBiBifKiw, .wjbi"*,he

:.\:ilUI.'l UfAMll' 'li.> .lAllIT
. , , , TENTH DAY. Hit 24, 1855.

mttriiMiott 6f UHc ma; %6i MR

aiMhiitttontevltig''

pTBBehf'-

5lr-.BW*ena insisted

.„. , _ ^..^Vnliaa that it',snouI4

'K6, ^hqvl^t '^esire. tbe'destmcivdii or

rf n>',iin$t' 'hi'nL Upon the roadi , I

! iruE vcrBiuu-T-u ibti 'tiiiGel bini.vou mny btesk Uie Jui

a^w;-«afia^;ii&rftES'j^4'^^^ of strychnia

^ntt^enU orihl^aloMch'.>d4'th£ a^torr^'U"Riis^jinf:tfo¥^ml^a oqbt^b^f of
MW'SleWns'j is flrtrt iheeoiiaiict 'of iiriipc^foe' "Or '4r.%Jilt r'WtiVilioiU.d te' be desiroia
br'kB(>wi^g«HMhtr<it^ChnIa;db<^>li;_'afhif'MV^%$^a^79u^

«f the deceased?' Letide'cUI y'

'VT^m florry'to Wllyod tliiit I _,

taenifeBed'mbe'itiqu^etyelnerday'tliat CotiK

n the Si

. Qorweo

r-. -, ■--,.-.-- jihink it waf

. ■ J - ■ ■ - - - ■ . - ""J ?';'^'ff> ^'i .'''' Mondaj

•VIST that be was oii Ta^day 'aiAt itliGa he' died ; t))^ phamhennaia

*1 can -proVe Ibis; I believe'a ^n of 'tf- -— - -''**-'<-^ ^- — ^—

i« taken 111 oh'^lind

vmi

.y atShteWsbOcy ; 'noi.jhm he'cau only Jifli
Dites he leU what had Ijiiphi^ of t% rest pf, tjifl
— ' '■ Had jou not better call.Siiiiih, ^itat is'Mn
prove this.'' Wlii^' i viVaf^Jeieav'&ll

atlhe Grown Hot*l can "proVe ■
d((wnt(t'pHive that he received some
^uhh 101: OUT or 4 If. he awed him."
WOney that the man had at Shrewsbury? '

JbiWtatI Smith' irhom+e saw here toiay, .- ^ ■ -.-r rrii— ■■■ — ' — L

Swiih wbhld have been in the handa of the Coroner, Mr. Ward, Ae 'fideiliily ppranerqf
Staflbrd^hirel "And again, whatever ProfesEor Tayior may sAf 'io-iaotVW, ' ^? nroi^
tbotk LcutdM lost Tuesday night to Gardiner to say, we (that fs' pr. tayfa;' ai)^ X^j
B«H>.liBvethit day finiabul ouranaiyslG, and find no traces of either ^rycjini)!, prO^^i;
acid; Cr ojpiftm ;' what can beat this from a mail lile Taylorj if he Gayi'wliat'^Jl|i||
alr»dytald of Dr. Hoiland'B evidence; mind you, 1 inow it, I saw in tSaclt and vrhi^
vliBt 'iVylor'KiidtD Gardiner I but this Is ttrictl; private and confldential, hilt it is'tfil^r
A^ T^siilB hM betliUg book, I know nothing of it, and it is of no good to any ocej;,.tte
ilepetitlon -it the samff'sidry ; " I hope the verdict to-mortow will tie Ujftt he die^, <ff
naiurel t«u«e«, and thiil end it^'biit the verdict was Dot so, aqd^didS^t^efi4i|t^^,^^
hiifljr'You to i4y -wlietrier npon a review of the whole of tnia evidenie' Wii ciiiijWitai|^

[» thHtltoi^Aifte tHacoiidluBliHiaUvtrse to thepi^gOaer.^^dlit is6iw~QrA
■Biem iertiapB eat4i' iddltMdiOh' m 'theiAileUts, biit-ta&eD M,a x^ole. ^ I
inbittlttoyOn,'len)i)^iyrew«ttbirtd'tht!ei)h^6itmofth'egidlto^thtBi:iian. .,','„„

gentlemen, the whole ^»se is before vqu. It will be for v

' ■#*'(

oVe^WheitfiedTfcy'i (WeSilre ainBsl
^.'nffiidhTl'i is ntlerly nnalile to' 4

.. _-ihi 'dWartfer' an'd hiiaupon him.'

■Vising ttloseoonKqueocesl^ By 'okii!ultjir'hiiiil^'','^d,Midei'ihoEe'Jf
- ' ' - - ' - oHui.irt* 'jrKWit 'BiJ Ann f will ti^i tfi/'" ■ '' -' "

Yoii have,

OB^xatnpledy of pevuniaPf lilbirtti<^,'«ffiich"h'^ ti atterly analite

peiiBllieeoflhetaw, -rfhioh'nlutllbrihi'dWartfer' -''-* *-'- ----■ '-'

smaU auwiittt, iffUht'fldiliiint'ViU meetth^-exigehcr^'iii
'ert the itnpendinf; catastrophe Und 'tuId, *H11: tmeratb With imdielKe

. ... -v.... ^ ._ -. _.,M.j=i. ...m..-..,.,.. H'\jui|i„j|d-ii,.^J. irt*'A

Sad tbst he bu Mces^

that be hw the tK<ua«f

■Ml-ftarty boBn^ he htu t^ice We^UlTett']^u«Eiikit)r

■adntMseeifti((ifcritBn'ia''M«r, Khd' Wii fldd ,'i
•iee ««Uh«-bbfei)Wdn 'ttf thB ■+erf pMfedh,'- V

iaaik inthe deMb, and ^fm OiVd't/^Ui^V aM'UMtiV>'V'^'i'^^'

trmbleandn. „ , — -- -,—.

ElAxa and of DO otfter. ' Yoti hava'tlwd>ft!eAct,ihBV to the ottBrtifost Of His ability;
T«lizei the purpMe fo^ whi^ WM sa^ktei id ystil^' d^lh w^'a^omplished.
Yoa have all those fhcts, lUid the ^ilidofibted'and iiQd)^Ted!"tiiist, that a Euhsidiary
poiMHi was IdBon»ed, Of wiitehtmow'havp'.Wn ftiind' in the hian'i body, aJthinigh no
tracM'may have been fiMind, Ibr thb Wwonttaha from'ttfe cdnsea' Ihave taj^ested; ot
thepiinei^t poUon, wboee'^brtMlOtl by the p^Mner we have traced, andwliose pre-
aenu wscbeWinitlieMUiptoaH'Whl^ aix:omi«Uled tHe death (^f the decettud. Itiafbr
yo« to tsk« all thoae «TOiimatsiic«» into yonr condderatioa.

306 TfiUL OF William palMbbI

Gentlemen, Toa Imve indeed hud introduced into this case one other elem^t which I
own I think wo«ild JUva h^n 'bettfer ^^nrftte^. Jpii Wy e |iaA ftm^ ^^J learned friend the
unosual, and I tlunk I may say unprecedented, assurance of his conviction of his client s
innocence. ' ' . '.

M^^ >8!w;f>«»*.^*^^.— No* npprecedented, .. i . ^,

T^e AMomeff^Oenm^l.'^lcask only «iy I think.it would harro b^n.better if wy t^^u^ied

^rwigei,a 4flClar»tion^ ,Fhi*t wottW h« th^kof

friend had ahrtMned from so s^rasge^.a 4deAarfftion^ ,W\u^ ,v,oM h« thv}K. of me if,
imitating his example), I «t this mop^nt stated 10 you,.|»p9n mjr V U9iio^^,' as,}>^ aid,
what is my iHtemal convietioB firopi a conscieijtiou^ consideration of this caa^ The
best reproof which I can administer to my Iparned fhend is to'ahstam from imita^dii^ so
dangerous an example. My learned friend ^n that address, of which we all admitted the

r>wer and ability, ulso adoplted a <*>uWie sbnietime^ resorted td byadYOCirtefe, btetwMch
cannot' hdp thirikUig is mor^ or \»m ao iniftlt; to a jury, the ^Endeavouring to intiknidate

day or other the innocence of the prisoner would be made manifest, and you would
never cease to repent the verdict you had given. If my learned friend was sincere in
tSiat — and I know he was-^^ere^ is nd man In whd^ ^he spirit of truth and honour is
more keenly alive— rhe si^-d what he believed; but all I can say in answer^ i£» that
it shows bow when a ipan enters with a biia^ upon his mind upon the consideration
^a subject jiejb led- into ^rror ; and. when my learned friend said that he had enured
ilpon this «ase 'with an unbiassed and an unprejudiced mind, who could have ,u^ed
to ftel -that ' never in anytiiin^ could he have been more deceived than in thinjbng
that? ¥6f w)io that has togrve his best energies to a defence upon such a <ihiirge
as this would' not shrink ih his own mind from the conclusion that he was to adyoeate
the cause of one who he believed to have been guilty of the foulest of all inygiwable
^rimefe? t say/therfefore, I think my learned friend had better have abstained -^m
making any observations wliich involved the assurance of his own conviction, I isay
fiu^er, I think he .ought in justice and in consideration of you to have abstained from
xemiuding you or telling you that the voice of the country would not sanction the
'Veipdict which you were about to give. I say nothing of the inconsistency wHdtn is
^hiTolved in swrn a statement, coming from one who but a short hour before had Qpm-
jplained in eloquent terms of the universal torrent of passion and prejudice by which
he Isaid his client was oppressed and borne down. Wny, ^ntlemen, in answer to mfir
learned friend, I have only to say, pay no regard to the voice of the country, whether
it' be for condemnation or ac^qnittal ; pay no regard to anything but the internal Voice
• of your own consdences, and the sense of that duty to God and man which you ai£ to
discharge upon this 6ccasion. Seek no reward except the coihfortin^ assurance when
you slml look back to the events of this day, ttat yoji^' nave discharged to the best of
your abUity and to the uttermost of your power the duty ttiat it. wa^ yours to perform.
I^ . upon a review of this whole case, comparipg the eVi4.ence, n^^on the one side, and
9pon the other, an4 weighing it in the eveu scales of, justice^ you can, come to a oon-
elnsixat of the prisoner's innocenqe, or even entertain ihat falr.and i:ef^sonable ampunt
0^' dpubt of winch the accused is entitled to the bea»efit, in God's name QC<|uit him. , But
^, on the other hand, all the ftu^ts and all the evidence lead your minds, with sf^tis^M^on
fo yotlrsMves^ <to' the" coneltision of th<d pdsoner^s guilt, theu, but then only* I ask for a
V^dkt of guilty all your hiands. For thef prbtect^ti of the g^sod, and for the repcasuon
6f pia %icked^| f^kfbf that 'verdict, ifc)y iriiidh^ aloti6, aS jt' fe^eiiis to me, the safetgr of
4o(Jii6ty can be ^ecnrei and th^ demana^ the iihberiouS'deinands,of ptiblic justice ^an
alone be satisfiei ' / ' ^/'- r -^ -t . > . ^ ' .^ ^■

' Xiord €SjiaCPBl8Cik--NG«Qt]muoB<p£ljb9- j«9,<l4i|naciM4d>iid(jr con^ diat^.theieodi of
pUblie ^stic^ the* Oou^ haust >npi^j' aijoanu^* X ibsAh^fMiuvB^y iivLty^ m thie.kagtiwied
^d complicated cks^,t6'bHlkg b^f^ yoUitii€bi^h<rii'Of"th€iJ«Videnee •giveit^iipoa-tfaetoiie

.side and upon the otlibrp,'wHh suph r^n^alrks'V^rl s^ifdi feelft> my duty to .make Ardour
dbs^'rvationl , . , Therefpre, ThbVever J)aaiifql .;lt m^y be, vi6 jsmgt now adjourn. YoUiaftust
still i»e kept s^est^r^4 ^fp^ ^^ )i^X^^,^i ^oV,must^ meet meaigainat 10' o'thAaa

J!i(oiijda¥ morning.

''■','■ i ill,'' •

aj'J.j.j,i,«'M. ■ii.i ;Mt.i.a..s;^iiraa,.4

*.'.

•J.'f f . ♦!»,-

'• >.

•tt »,

jBLEVENTH DATS TEIAL.'

Mat 26, 1866. .'

Mr. ^eani ^hee.-^lHj (iord, I Jtave the permiBsktt «f my lettmed friend to Men-
tion that there is a bin of exehattg^, dlited Sepr. 1W55, ^ 500i^ drawn 4if Bahtttfr
and lusoepl^ by Oootoe, «hi6fti be wiU iiH^wme^fd^t^intwith ffo» Lordthip'tper*
wiMioit. <It is inf th« ^oft«iiioa <0f iftle 4idNI«r^ ft Jp«»#diy <<yf tfie nanus of SwiddeUs.

JM[r./ames.-;T%'e ftic^ thajtthere Is a t)llf for 5061 fh tii^hitids of a Bfr. Swindells
df such a date, and that that "fcljl may be put in, we concede^

. /. haadi CAXJ^wUKt-lt vx^y be put in -v^^en we arny(e at the pvoper stage.

Kt: SirfeantSkeei^^lf ytmr Lordship pteases, we' will produce it in a few moments.
^EWmdimtorisnotheii^at present* <> c . ,

Mr^BiltON AuiBRSON.^Haad it up to'xae^ and JwiU-pot^ Him at. the pvoper
time. ( The hUl ioas thoftfy afUncan^da pcodktoid' and AcoM^o th4 'Court)

« ' OBJkMQ0& TO THE .TORY. . „ . ' , J, , ,

,' Xiord CAMPBELii.— Gentlemen of the jury, we have it len^fli arrived at that stage of
.ihese sQlemn proceedings when it becomes my duty, as the chief ji^dge pr^idlng in this
court, to ejcplain to you the nature of the charge brbuj^t against Che prisozter, uxA
j^ose questions and considerations upon which your revdiot oi^t'Uy be lound. And,

Sutlemen, I must begin by coiguring you to banish &om youri minds aU<ihat.yoa have
ard with reference to these proceeungs before entering iatp that has.,, There ia jflo
■doufbt that a strong prejudice elsewhere did prevail .'against .the^ prisoner at .the .bar. ta
the county of Staffoid, where the ofience for which he has now to answer is alleged io
liave been committed, that prejudice was so strong that the Court of Queen's Beneh made
sn, order to remove the trial from that county. The prisoner, by his cQuhsel, expre^ed
a«wish that the trial should take place in the Central Oiminal Court. ^' To etukme that
wish to be accomplished an Act has been passed by the Legislature author! dng titte Court
of Queen^s Bench to direct the firial to taae place in the Central Criminid Courts whei^
it was believed and known that the trial would be fair and impartial. I must not ot3y
warn you, gentlemen, against being influenced by what you mayhav« befisre heard, bat
I must likewise warn you — although I am sure it is an unnecessary eaution^ but one
which it is my duty to offer — against being improperly inflnenced. by iihe: evidence that
has been laid before you; because there has ueen evidence whioh/^artafAiy.ivplifijaj^
the prisoner in transaclaons cf a very discreditable nature. }X appewf ,^t ne had
.&rged a giaesyt many bUI^ cf e:(chajige, and that he h^ entered into tran^aclions not of
0, reputable nature. These tranaaCtiQns,. however, would have been e^^cjlude^ from yoiir
consideration altogether, bad it not been necessary to bring them forward to assist you
in arriving at your verolct. By the law and practice of some countries it is allowed^ to
xaise a ^probability that the party accused has committed the ofience which he has to
answer, to show uaLi he has committed other offences ; with a view of Sho^ihg'thatlh^i^
an immoral man, and not tmlikely to commit other offences, whether of the same^ or 0f
a different nature ; but- the Hw of 'England is different, and, presuming avery man to
be innocent until his guilt is eStaibUshed,^ it allows bsis.gailt to.be eslaUishedonly b|br
avidence directly oanaaoted with the charge brought against him. .

Gentlemen, it gives me great < satisfaotion Aa fiad that this ease ha^ ,bei^n sp/ pfXly • lav^
|>efore you. £veQrthin|( hsts been 4oda. thfit laoi^d be acconipjished fo|r th^ purpose ,q^
^flSistini^ the jury iu qomine to a weight qoficlvuion.,, The uxosecuticm haisTg*,^ W-^
.•up, by the Government of the. cbufttj^p so. that justice i|i|y' be eaectJy^Jy a^^WiJ^t^f^'
The Attorney-General, who is the !first law onTccr of the Crown,' has couducted the
prosecution as the Minister of Public Justice. Again, I am much pleased to thimc ths^
the prisoner appeals to &aire(>had/ample kneaiBs toi:p]Bp«ca:ior) and Gaodirat[,'hita df^ce.
Witnesses very pcopedlyi have been brdugbt.firola aU,part«.of thekh^js^pm tf^if^s^tiln*
his defence; and he has had,lthead^«u}tiH^;of>havii^.hi8 qase, coinducte^ ,hy one of |he
most dislingui^hed advocates ^\ 1;^^ English ha^,. , Oeutlemeiv i^^\' f^^^f>}ii^X ^ecommes ~
•to yon to attend to everythiug tJtiat>.%fl,so .caoq^enfly,^^ ably, .aiud, ^o iinprpssivel
Hcorn that advocate, with the excepliofi of^hi^ipwn private personal opixuon. It]
my duty to tell you that that ought to be' no ingredient in your verdict, xou are
to try the prisoner upon the evidence before you, apcording as that evidence mi^ be
laid before you upon the one side and on the omer, and by > that alone, and not by ai^y

Slnion Qf his advocate. I feel also bound to say that it would have been better if his
vocate had abstained from some of the observations which he made in his addrras to
you, in which he laid great stress upon his own conviction of the prisoner's innocence
of the crime imputed to him, and of his apprehension that if you returned a verdict Of

TB!Al.OP,^;i.^W>'iW?^ft ,

btblti^ uid It ma} htfl ^^,a,tflr,i#r

•«.»' Ar,^ ,..^nr, iM ^Ih'.i- h.TiH tflL

■nee, M it m»y Wda jurj W belicM (^taprisonci'l, , , „.., ,, ,,. . , .,, ,
expmsahlB jwrfect convictlob ofWi' it^hpience. Aod, i^yon tb^ oUjjii: >»n4!''%
•drocate withholds an opipion, Ihe jury ma^ «upiM)M I|)»t )n; ja .co^KJi^Ul o£ii» i;|ifi>t»
mlh, wbenailtiiltiedaif of t)i« ^locate [opteHft^aivuDUi^t 4p(^ V)fjuT.'ff°^°^
Eia aidiuon. i . ■ i . i

. 8one^a^■thfc^la^■l|^aWo(J^:e;r<jfn)«tiIIg»v.M■,Tj(l^^i»1;,{Ml#*n»•
in opportunity of ainlnitt^fitig 'fbif. igcfiiooflaai piifipicirijo. ftU ujjoi* |tt(.«ia^'«ii ••*
ihalon Uodaja, i'Scn the irtifofi frka syppoMd/to tpypjMcn «4wW b«.«(»«t

purchiaed stirchnliie; fhH PiJi'so'd' ^Jrii'leyc^; pijd tliat.' p^'.uiey 41I?gB, Jjis.Bov^lHrii Wwe
that transaction,' flefnrt fhJ ifeoJ-.i-IiIlb li «a«'gc(ins" on, .and.atterwfj^B, was (liU,"' *
plllty, and noC otah- riittoortlfJ'W»"i-" "Pn the pflier side, it.dii;e«iit«ida4 M.JW
an to say-whethn or MM trtllv.itmtctulddV'Aa^llie eriranSar at ths batvM fMj.W
tletlmnf pfrfudi<iBi ' ihliil he hftdni, lnte»at,in |he dia(h of the dcceMe^v**^?*
thecoDeToiy'thnt'Cb^qnlthbt-UI'e'idfecMaed w^lo bispn^j^djce: furtber, tl»at (mIw.
dMnot d)«''/n>iUp6i«iii'hii''sti7'chn)tt4 but f'TOm natural diseue; .that .bil fym^Wf
irera flio»e Of oafitfit JIbmbf. atuliiot of .poie'oo ty Birychninej.anii rur<b«r> .Jt U ew
4^,iA^ 'Hat nb p»H' W;tf*'tviacnce*liieh W dccq given shuwB anjliujg ithich ,«
utiWrtt. WMh (h^ gutrt 6r thb prisoner. Gcnllemcn,' it li for. you Wd^ttfn

«liie"''bet«-«n''th*'a!lepit5miii 'ot the one siJe and (he other, accurdioa totlK evidanCfr
JkWortBTitfoift Wa^iUliilpoiBd Upon jou, knowing Ihat the life of the prwonecis »t
■ttkeV'and' 'fP'yeU-aHd' hitn' eulllt, lie niust expiate his crini? bj an Ignomiiious d^tli'
Hh bFmtlhrtlirt^tlArtcetBAtyait should be convinced of bis innocence pr, lu guilti
SWWjdiT-artietiimvffiee'lDf'fiiigulli, you will rescue Mm from the fate nithwhid
h^H'th^toif^" On thcolTiet hand, when yon have lieard the ■latcments whicB V^te
ftWoWtWdene*— IfyOu' lire satisfied Of hie Euilt— it will be jour duly torelutnivtr-
aifct hfkntttjf'fiit If t6*'n6lBooer were to escape with impunity, there would be no.B»fet5
tUMliBMInrl,'aiidWf^VouldfBll to pieces. Gentlemen, the burtbeo of piuvin^ UB
^IH re«t« Un the prtseentlbn i and unless that is fully lust^acd, and youare convuicM
apoH the eriaeacetflat he Is guilty, then it will be your duty to acquit tte prison": bii
Ma;caMrfa|.Wnd,i;ourannolVpect that witnesses tho^^^ -- '"* -—•*■-

befoc

pn,"i'^et<iict tir'vtiSlty nay saliifactorily be pro

AtkW^^ftiflar'gtiit Intportatice to see wliet^er t

It 'trttBB; ihr'wBetfiier there was not, br wliether thei;e is

»#il' coriirirttltdw -^--- '^~t.-'-~.'~ -■= ■..--

ibM;' if Vtirtir lie 'i

BOfe^iAfch Ii^.tieeu adwwo

I iae^^&.fpen, .luuJ tfie rnowt
tnif h,(if itf ehsree affliaX 'W
«i.K«ie minds of ll« jmR
ICC ffisMhSr Terdiotaorit IJ
^,j'osee Wbetber the de«"»
L nuii'yon will look at wb'^ "•
I ^"it the prisoner not dbI}"*"
j^HppoT(jini|y,to(idmi»i#e«»

'jw'itf.TinKeed'lortaicw*
iMi,8na'I"Biwst,.>mplai:e J«

exehaniM, which he dnv, and nhicfa i
lU dle'luii;

_,__ ,..._ , rt^muSi.

Be*»rao ilire'orfthe 37tli .of OotfaW,

«#tr 'MM -«V«r' miU'likihtti'td irienfl

« t» *-W!rgt«rftH adrintcM W F¥stI1(

«ibnktai k Ven Urge debt with a.a e

i'AAttoFIO.WO/.WSBiftie'to'himiipoh'

naifiei that 'he would hsT« been ^blt

fll«drtri«!, Wriieh hsd heea effected uj

laWof tMi'eolintt^ wisely farhiilE BD

]il«fMitiler«l ia that lift; liiitiuiibi

MrM'lrl^ fbr On})' amounc, although no

telMfcfrtng it to anotber pevaon. T

•f 'W'IUt Fahun'- a bantTupt, withe

MDi'by bis relations— B policy to the t

W WflUuil Pabner, the piiaoner at the bar. .Ub died ii

(iMoMed tfabi tha IS^oeOt iosureiJ upon hi a life would be. tlie iies^,' of «na

lalMer, the' primer, to take up (hose aeceptaaces ; but tlie P^iiDiDeaf;^sIt»T»SUn>n«

^Bd* denied their liability upon that policy, aud refused !« pay., ibpnie .^roae^ BRf

l^eB^ng'embBiTasiDient— peymenCa were urgently £equir«tl, and then 4:as.^»figeriUftK<

Bwy were inimeJlBtely peiii that tlio law would be put in lotoe, and .to" ''" '

flmeriei which had been ira long carried oi ...... . .

Md^hroitf^t to light.- -. i -.' >' - i'' .!

Now, gentlemen, 1 irill begin with the evidence of John Espin. He v/f^lhe, foi^mi

<»- Q-i-j.l L. t-ij.i.- nn.,ni lm, „,„„ „l,i-l, innM. remainM dBff.. Ila.am..."l

a probabUity ^i) aitectai

rangnc to ugnt.-

JW, gentlemen, 1 irill begin with the evidence of John Es)
otUr.'Padwick,irho held.^eSOooi. bill unqn wldcli 1000/. ipisa)aea.ii<|tf., jiB,«Bi(s,,.Vnt
^a aolicitor, pncU^nfiin Dovies SlEeef, Setfceley Square.. .I,ute4MLao)iciCiu^fw.^t,
n^wlek: tiftiiduCe »Ml fOT iioOUt., whieb was, placed In iri*,fcan4«ite,M& SMff»<>B
ftff'^ p™p«»<* ■■ " ■"'" ... * - ~

of 'Str^wbrRlee, tb«

wrldng, (mtves tlW
lirisotter; but that t
iua that tAei'eft'rb'

§lnitrn bv'Wi
le toihe-Wi
^d'hy-Ba^l:

<Aotal& when th^ ti

*f JWV.'EiiiM'nafb.

vneiriiwjtiuit. ':f>
M'l)fe"Ml&'ta''«^'
Ht'.'Pilhhu^fi
^Mf.'Pratt.bXdl
"'"TllenMi'.StByi
#iequ«' t(tr Mil. ki
i*»'it'*»krathe(^i
lallbrtH'delWnai
Cook's hundwritlD

dwritiD
N ftOt'lnjproUlUlit '
lUltluMMll lo^tt'd'

jiliin<rf;'beca(Uea'
SttWbrillE^ '«U>T
*tBlilB,.l«*»Wt
-writing; and eerti

forgery would oe liabk to the «niiiiiial Uw. Mr 4 Stoveos aavt y hw^ tW. ri»equn jfartaUJl
WM dr^wn the pi^soMi; had jwa ««mun^ witli ii«. Xhc»k.wiUiMn,(Btahn0»''<k«<'l«(WtB
called ; and he fays that h€)jU el^k 'mih» ]K«t](maLP4F»ldJt<M.SllB4K ogj^ndmi^ > >«^te
prifloner had an accoimt with the hank'; I Meeivedi tbe^«vi^.fiGanl Slr/iBaMiec!f jraedi ;
It was carried to Pahner'e oradiC AU tbi« iQJ«llt Mw^ \i^ dftte-Mth t^ «Oaefttt)«(f
Cooke, though Palmer had the beiii^ oiiiv ^ ffwcht h^ve beesdoM >hrdMMNW>frMtoe
arraogemeot between Palmer ««dX)ook. JNow: Pr«itiie jfftr#JH4i|lwwih> it <HP9a«MttiB|4
by the coux^el for the prieoner. ( Vie lparafi4f,fy^themmtMgi»Himte 9fMr, /Vfl#f>>i
Now, brother &h9% if ti»e bUl tti^wjajch.ywiwfae Jb tQ\)><kii)»dM<»^j|iaifthiiilrh<tilr
have it put in. " ' J. >i^*ollOJ

Jljr. fi07otm^£Hb«e.-»I£0r«liriiQndihip>^I«aset^ . ' > • 'I'm '■•K'i < * i>> -> ^i^ • v.u/I
Lord Cam wxLL^Iit is^bitt'-dvtowt'by WniilM'Pelteer«MiiX>Mflc/IMiM>'1liig^,
fleptenber 20, «« Three vtoaOke af«» <dtfte ^y t^uny oM«r tlle*«Miib<ef l)6W/>M^fWe
leeeived,'^ and it ie «iidiMMd ^ WUliaili'Biliiierl*' Iti»daet2SiM> t)efceinb«^ ' ' ' ^i^^ V

Mr. Serjeant Sfa?«.— That fe if dMfertii^ fcfll ftom the 6n<* ilietttioned iri the eriacnc^f]
Lord CAMPBixii. — ^It is of fi (i^eretit date, but X thInV ft m^ possibly be '^ nui^tajfif^
Mr. Serjtant ^e.-^fhe oiffioer has; the biU thai> 6m ,o^\b^.2a»AJ>mmie9, iOie
bill whioh.Mr. Baron. AldersQn.hanfcUd to y9vf h^rdfi^Y^M^tVOQ fi4t(«ientMiBed/«4 «|1
until this, mominft., .. / ,, . . . -.u.-iUi'M

Mr. Babom ALDkBflO!f.-*^T]^t if 4Kait» «ight. SSm hill f(» theiWestev tfanfintt^
«aadueonJ12ndI>epflnilitt:. ^Siiiittaaatbet bill headed itt:ailhafd>atf the twuaimfc,
and pnodxised by no hoidev. • . / .< •:•«. fo' ut

Lofld €Ail»BatLZ..-*^nM tteKt"<vi<itnefle Is ^hn Ai«Mhaw,«n aeeoujiUmC'aft Ruffdet^-
< The teamed Jmdpe riad the etidtnee cfMr. ArmOuM,) Then John WfliUbanl^ a b#ColM«r
BtBugeley*, is <»Ued.. iTheleahied Judge read ike emdetuietfBC^. fTan^tmA^ emti «!»
4kat i^'Mt: JofmS^tMmy.) * 'Then Mr. 'Strawbrfdye is reeaHed, and he says **Ott ^h^tiOi
Kovember, 1656) the prisoner bad a batenee of 9/. 6e, in Maltemar } nothing w^ftA&4o
tht credit of hte aeeonnt afterwards : the Isnt payment to the eredit<of faitneoount'nifea
mi' the loth of Ovstober, 1850.^ N«w this eertainly shows ehat when he sigiied the ehlMge
Ar KMD/. that wae'dnnon the 2BA he had no means whatever te answer ft * and Items
finances were at the lowest ebb, and that the urgency for payment wae iwfy gMat* thrin
Herbert Wright is called to show further iarge debts dae fitom Palmer «]^an the afleged
neceptonceaoftiiemodwr. {Tkekamed Judge reud the etUtetusetf Mr ^ WHJfkt;) TheniLifr.
iStvawbridge is sgaitt recalled, and he provee the acceptances last prodaoed net-te bein
the handwriting of-Seeah Palmer. He says, ** Thie is a dlffH«nt hnndwriting from hen :
it may be an imitation, but it is a faint one. Charles Wetherby, who WM enamined' §tt
asiether porpoee before, is now recalled. He is the Secretory to* the Jockey GhA, and
l:ee*a' the froeouats^ as appears in Ms first examinatien. (7%« teamed Judge mm! ffe
emeHie ^' Mr,- WWierim,' and aleo the iettere tkereim r^kfred «)*> Gentlemen, I m udt d
-nAisenne tfaM a^ood'deat' will turn «n whether the dieqfae ibr dSa/;'i«fisfi;red to Inr Mr.
^Wethe^y really wae sent by Coek or wae not eent hiy him. U tt was net^ feat by*4)oaky
it will'bea csBenmstaace -showing Pahner's dealing withOook'sipeopertTf 9 t»i *tfan«e
tflfiaie many otooumitinces of the case whieh you wilt h«e« to oeaaider;
.' Mr. Serjeartt ahee^^JUt, Wetherby stid he thought It -was sent'b^ Cook. ' ' ;

Lord Cam pflSLju—L tell the jury to loojc ataU the eYidence,.and the cheque has not
been produced.' It waasent by, Wetherby to Calmer. There^ ha^ notice been given to
^produce 1^ and it has not beei) produced. {Hh J/ordsaip ^hen rea4 the evidence o/Jar^
J^ttthr.) Then Mr. Stevens was recalled, and he says that Ppl^s^fir^ was sold at TattersatTe
on the lX)th March last by auction, and fetched 720 guineas. V ' ^ ,

Kow,' gentlemen, in order to finish this part of ihe case, that we ma^ go to the circum-
stances of the alleged poisoning, 1 will now read to you the evidence of Mr. Bergen xe-
'tipbctift^ -fte not flndii^ of the ebeqWe Ibr 4150/. Yon will' reooUect thatafleribe inquest
thlft pepe^ <)f ihe ^Irisoner were* talteii piossessfon of, and a ejection ^made of them i amd
?>ttlkiei fi<;rgen. the chief Uttp^tme/tnAent' of- police -at- StefEbtd, eayi^ '' i attended 4he
ii«retr«r'e'i)f<ineM'4>n «h^ bodvof Mr/C«ok; aficer tim Ter^t was returned 1 eeanohfed
'iihe hCn^eof Palme^^ (ft dateirday ni^l^ l&th December ;. I found some papen^aad I
to<^ HHMkk fi^An the sur|*ety idto the ntawhi|p*rooda ; a great pBOportion of theese pnpcrs
Were fbttnd in' a drawer, in ' the tmk^»y \ a &w Were ISeond elsewhere— eome in Pamice^e
-bedroom ; 1 eearctiedl every vai't of the-honse fbr 'these, and 1 put all I Sound into efte
place In the dttmtns-nxF^* 1 afterwards Iscked^tbedioor, and pot the key in my pocket"
And here you woind have-ex^MOtedto find ^the^ cheque^ became it was xetncned'iby
"Wetherby to Fsftner, and Pabder profsesed' to attach vahie.< to it, and requeatsd
'Wetherby not to pay any money of Ceok^s in his hands until ihat cheque <wa8 a%tJsfiad;
but the cheque wbicn you Wonld haire-expect^d to find..theie is not fi>rthcoming, luod if Jt
had been a gentdne faignafnre it would have been of impostanoe to the prisoner, bn^how-
ever it is not forthcoming. (The teamed Judge then read the remainder of Mr, 3vffeM*e
evidence.^ Qentlemen, test 1 Aonld omit it, I will mention what strikes my mindy
namoliyf that the Circumstance of Mn Pafaner remaining in thn fionntzy after tha-BQa-

8

vikeii^'iiitotMisis^Mlibtt la yoar miad ; but 1 9110011 also mMxm^ that altkmgh he max

-^htiTB'doiie 80 froiii'tfiMiitfe 6f intibceiiee. Iidnay hatie dmU io ftom ^hinki^g Um% ttcan

atk coul«»!|ke biid ^WiiKij^^itfthiiig w«ilul bd digdorezed a^nsftym. Then Kr. Hennr

. AanmtniA IM«fie li^ctfl^ ttuifae ii i floHoitor in tib^ fom^ CfaaVb, D«ftae, and CfaxiM,

(•f WM^ latt. ' ! ' HtB -Mj'b, *^ I kti«iided'thelB»iaei<( on itiie iMdy <^ .^m PaloMr on behalf

'ioftfae'WaMftCe'^iOflifiiJlf/^ <iyu Aiit^df Jwf^r«M/tj|c««ul^ Now,

.«0)Ml«sieB|ji» M Hfeeixivloi^iieilt of Mlr'/Fiet'd, I fcnbw not faw it is eonneoted with tb|s

Uqttliy.^ iV^he <^llM 4i4'^aig»!of Mr. J^d to laqtiire as to the ^iFoumstaaees of Walter

IWtticir^A hatt(th^aiidaiijto4hii«lr6utaUMaees't«^^ hm

to do with it.

Mow I proceed to that part of the caae;wi<|i' (leftpSBbe jto ^ihe trwiaaetimfi at Sktews-

^¥Pi^iip^9^mf^V^ 4w^ <^4ho,4eAMSf4f/ Now.'gHltaacPy iroit~can.reeoUeoi that the

,D]^t i¥m«A» caQed, oponithi^iUaalviiaSilsteael JSIthw^ (Mt<kmrms4Jiu^nad.a,pmi9m

qfthe evidence 4if'(^r%JFi$h^,) i |iow« ^nt^^mcflv QM Of ihe iV^f»tfmw» ^JjacumstiHices in

i>^acf^e>,,that it ^ouJI,d ^pear from yhat.palnvBB jSyi ^ t]^i^;C9Qk JM bee^ Matind^ thatt

h& jtralmer) bad been putting something ,iniip his gl&ss i and jei^ Strange to sajr, altaough

t^at s^etofs an'tindOixSted net; he remaixiis ebnistanijy iii coii^any with Pahner, still

-plgtcingMMI^re'eaafldenGe in hiw ; and when ill, Pahner k sekit tor. He ositakilvBeeBis

««a hstve ba«»^WBRlBr tb0 infioeaoe df Palxaer to a'V«vy>|$E«ttt'di«teei WeU1bea,lPahner

having stated to the witness that Cook was drunk the night before, Piohersays^Joek «eiw

.itainfy was luit drank. ^BU LoreUk^ thuLstad dfiafikerjfiiktieiyefJ^fu ^ubtf^Ajeuidencei)

^Gartainly^if .Coiak hadindaoed Piahar to advance S^/.^^igHmttoiwipywitian that he was

to be repaid on the Monday, andihen employed another pexaoaito^ealisot jtbebats^so as

. Io prefipnt Pisher having a zepa^iiaaat of ids jponeY^ that :wfiiM ihaye ,hfMPf s^jpcw^i^iid

4»a thepairtof Cook. (2%c«4maadb-qf J^r.^ilW^i.^vM^^ ^

Ji^..jQws$^Mr. Rmd^mndMr. Gibtom^wm theu rmfd Jfj^ ki^jAvMipi}. J^^ the next ^lisit-

.'pepslhat I wiUread to you is Mrs. Brookes,, although sh« .waf Q<^<ieJE«^i««Qd jwtil the ^-

,|(Mwliig.day, because she aBish9sthis oSajr at^hrewsbm^* .Mrs. ^A^n Bj(49]|«»««fl^ '^ ^

. Uve at MsAchestor." The learned ^ud^e .ruad Mr». J^imi^'$i efifkfMh. md ^b^pvk 7his

eads the aSair about Mr. Cook's iUness «t Shxewsbury ; an4,'-t(Mcaa>by > i<Mi^i>M feaUy

, fmKHiiits to very Uitie^ but you observe it is ocmmeiBM' with .iirh«it.foUo^%.lifU(Hi><b^<V9-

. tomed.to Jli]^geLay«, >'>i</.i:.*

Now^gent)lemeQ» the scene shifts, and you have Eliv^beth MiUa «^^ (bef<N»)j»m i
and she corUinly is a very important witness, i Th^ Ueana^ Jf^nig^^cml UjpmUm if #e
yevidenee if Miobeth Mm.y £<(ow, g^tUman, this is a most miltmli99^^^ ^'tfP,
iMut to vhiehy bo doubt, yo«r ajttention will be very stro«gIyad4res8«^ X^ilvUxiess
says, "He'* (that is, Palmer) «< sat down in Cook's room; Idid.not«99h«m. fi«s««tUl
about a quavtoc hafora twelve.'' (ZAe iearued Judge r^ad a fwrther. portif»y^.^mhmg*
evidence,) In aaswsr to certai»qii0StioBS whioh the leamed^o«uasel 4vi the jpas^oMT 9i^9
no doubt aoefledingtohis instructions, she said, '^He*' (that is St^vsendX^ i|io^«K^gsf|[e
file any money ; not aftrthii« i he has made me no promise." Gentlcmp^.th^se oufi^ops
certainfy iadunked a moilt foul c^ge against Stevens and agMpst £I|!B9beth<lS^m 4^
w w B fli i Mug? thatid»ihw^b»att bribed bcrMr. ^evsensto come and give (pexjared,e(vUI«n^ ;
X must say that I^do-aoi see tha tmattent pnetence for such • suggestion. Mr.^ St^^is
appeared to me to Cjoiiduct hnnself with the moft perfect prop^ety^ i^d in t]}^ o^ji^ way
which he could have done. *nie charge is also made that Mr. Stevens had gone \^th a
newspaper to inciU'cat^«' something in Her )niiid wHch was not'tni^^ iii'^raer that she
might come and gif e f&t)ie evidence : but lihe Says, " Mr. Steveiii never reaid to ibe'ftota
& newspaper, or talked td nie of Codk's Wmptbms befbre his death.^ iTheletirftiid'^^e
liHtd a farther portion <fihe wittiMfB evlMdiX Th^n faeT depbsiaotf ta^en bjeftittfl^
. coroner is read ; I do not kriowVheAcirtt Is wished that that should be r^ ttgal^i

Mr. ,iS(er/a(mi( jSsW,T~'^.e sjbould like 1^ haye it read* . , t.. {..ivvt?

Lord CAMBBBuu—Byv^aU means let iti be rea4« > •Ghentlemen^.srou. wi)^ JjpitcM» t^,
and see whether you observe: any:and what difference between the aocount_p% wre
befnre tbaxofconar aad.thdtaittBOMntidkajgftFOiWhfiAifiMiiMo^d^'h^^
tk»^ tke wMrnees taken, hefme tke imimfir, Mm>thm tm^ ' :(^<^<;«Wi^iMa) 791W\?i^
xwnark the omission ofhei; baliigalkfrosilakdPQg.tilM I^U^-tM. is>y^iwpy t a ^^ »»»fmy >
but yon will say whether .tbatwh^/WaSiigtaAedi«.QQl':SVbbsVwig»Uy'i^ «HW^ Wh^

•videnca which die gav« <m,wi^mh0Xk.^ %fmw^ A^ii^^^^'V^^'*^^
•ay4, "Iwaa under es^uninatiaa 4(efo« tka.noniner. abouV * ^wl*>^Mb<hf>W»ooi[n(*ii
x^ard to her oro8SreB(ainiaation,.IvQught .tA««ie»tMnritb«lk it nilftti¥»|iC»adMOto^W9tJh«flfU-
larity, becauso the dqpo8kxQn.haforo.tbe mcBroner, m^ to. hftvej J^an sead lapm mg^
and then bean croai-exaMKUiedaiponvthat»J».>i4ifl..hlBd}yiiiQSB\^liima.^ w^

dicttanoe of tiase,; j.fterv .a long «xaBa*»atioii,<t», atato^ ^watlff ad^t, J^ (fla^dtxor .iw^tfi4 «>
atate, whaa.befare thatf anotiaiaaiir ; ^MitjK^a/vFillsair wlMth^^tfiem la ap^'y«ia.tanal.4is-
«r«toancy betnqen the aocomit.whwh gw^hartra mm Jieacfi>^ad 6?0S,*ff 4a^t»D.
Iwftdre .the eovonar aad the .airidsiiee which ahe.»gavo.*>efore y#u- iy^te Uarmdy^dsfe
read the.remamder t/.the w^bumHaeHdmce^} tt.waaMisjl^Wcgjeriy pointed *« ^«*JW*^?*
ihat^idiadidi^ity wlKaliefore thaiaQiane£|.<QflMjBQitJMKlltea89«i|hi^ lirath» . xChat^be

ilLlU«bMvAiUli<lUd>ailliAia' „„, „ ,„ ,

Mritfraa afe^MMn^ifi iHMD'BfailSay'fhe 16^, sfMr- COcA 1

letter ia shteii" eJ

I Appenr tdi+tftii!

fticndof Coo!" ■

ppenr tdrj'tf

- , „ .,__ „_ _>,. CooS;"ttiif''iWiu.>w>»^

U«Uj'ilita>al>'iil''MIII»Dd')riih'tdHlttlVeIi. Blit at t3ie ntmc Mie'tBere iH"i:li«Ui-'
« W iqihlM»*>HOTh><"ttMy^Bh»k'Touto draw a dWerent' condnjIo&'btitT «&('««<
«g»ci»itil.Tam»18i«e'tMng,liowe«er,whleh does etrike oneTerjmuoft til'mJOf/
«! ■■■ a t O m *it(w»*Meh ht ^mtea. Toti will recoDeet what had bi^nili«'ej^jitatM of
CMM*fiaalAIM«tMlr'W«i'<*Htten «Ti the Simdav, and n^at Are the irords (!fai'te(ur.'
SmwJ wilvrbHtMan'mn^fDrtia'tAulave famrd what his ^rmntrntu ' w«re ; kha'1l#
JI«dMaf'<W( k Ib^gur nw^thM. There -*a8 H6 dMrh'tca, »* Mr. namim
rw iii» fci aiwil>>a iBBBWhihad attended Mia, ibbsI ha^e ktftiwnL (ffit iot*)!;^^
rta*!*' ArttW jUHMi^Mraft-. TMn*! c»i4«i«.) Then he IS »)ced sboat htide^tlciti
tbU»BlrMricM'1rfti>tWtM tnWlDrt'. T do tmI kiun' «hettiii'« M iiMM tMt'K^Wlj.

fSftil"?:ftffi^V:»p .ta' I "'''■1'""

l)Ad. vU, itijeluiiiv •mong ouK

*,M«wtai) tna otamrtng IhatM.
^viW. . ,t»" i»r<6fc> (Art W
m ti«. iliipo«itioQ of Sbw»»b w"
in 0/ Jtfr. A'imtim, to*™ M" <*•
(.I/ie™iyoK.r/(A*KFi(i.f».) .!(•»■
it hnpoTliHit it ' ' ~— i..

^ri^SS!5^i.*9^***5"t'*'t'1*W, '>eftmt»» W'^flr«>d.*»t he did not »e

tt till QM Tueaday mohiing, whoil Be utf coming np here, That owtuulj "9

IT omdi; ifutth^^, geptlcneDf you *
n read befbre yon, aloiaagii then U

a omiMiDn wMt^.lffMlWf

ELEVENTH DAT, Mat 26, 1856.
to b« borne in mind, time ii no oonlndJaUon of nnything thtt he hu nid.

t^tflm Bai Tue*i«j^tlie,«ix,_gmia»fof pMjKbaVwwC/mppUHK.ii'JtoiriigtntMMb.-if
TOiLleUeye .both, a ve^y-senous e»« u.adfilvWi wBPB»ff«ilIwmlw»liirlio»«'iie'*S'
c^nelwuQii .that (lie ^mplfliiB of Mr. Oookwe*Bi««ii»W»'-«W<.*tw*'5»«»«ii'''Ifrro«'
tfiujiirfie ^raptipiiw are ncconntod Ear. by^ n«ie)j,.,o(diM)|^t«|««iWi, fOaMne'tk*
fftot of str^chniDe. bdng obtaiHed- by tIi«.{inMiaei.)it tll^rlwi i«>?nUln>iUD mttyfinter
weiolit; W if you should .coRte la the cQU(^.uunCi.lh^t-tl)pi4}m^4«N't«Mt£Qi^iOMHc'

^(Jllbilcd OQ the Moodji)' ni<^t """' "^— ' — -•-<■• -— ——• .._jj.. ^ — ;>._., —

t^aa a tVftful cue is made

SiBt a^Vpoiu attention to 1 , ■ i-,- •■ -

ychninc that was purohased on tbo Taesdiy iaar>iDS..:Ttn-WMnlrMnidiA>^lttK|t
prisoner bold ui that ve must believe nothiag; th»t, La, woiffi ,inwll»* Mi O^trnt "
eyexvthinKt Mid DO doubt, ■ccordiug to Ma in*lcuctions,.li8 ^v^lig^ p^>pert]rdeM4*3^aM^
S(r. Mewlon was tobabeliesed; and, diibelievuig Mr. Mewjoa jaw Wa»**i*taon ii * Cl
Munday evaauigi but.di " ' — . . ■.

evidence of nil ^^ios. 01

iht and . TuflsdKjf jiigitt«^o., qwijwntlpiiilifll
lut against luDi. . GeMlqne^ ,|, lwAaiiH«fwM<
nuw what exjilanaCinn ■fojjld' ,!*(], gl»aijiift»p«
d on tho Taesday morning., :Tt«,-leiw!»p4M«ni

opined on tba Tueaday msroins, and. no explanation ia;^T^.af it il
opuiinl did not favoar.ua witQ tfao tbeorf which he had fitnied in<)il*!v , .
specling. that gtiyeluiii, and Jiav lie . aonsidered >t to b» caI^i9(eat wU^ thtiTieo- ll«r<
Ke Biige«sted.. Tber^'u na.cTideoce of the. iDl«*>tiiui with wluahit'l'vOilpanniM^'
Ibero la no eiideoce how it was applied, what became of it, o- —>-•-— to*—-^

seQtbiU^nl-'W'H'wM hdl at ' W {nfluen
'■'-*tb«tAtile"" ■' ■■■ " ■■■■■

1 I say, eenth
•"Ule'MheKAet

Md'T abtkrldbs iftH
pOttttMcoPt^MKI

The next witiMstr

iimit'4f Mr:>8leTei«V.'

aHacHa4'to'UM')«ttai
Wte;i K«d^««a86^et>>W
JDstifled the oownetbi
yt^ hok'pnAfeay jUW

Tffll'M'l'MehlitiHin^

i^imi'Ot'Mt^. CoM^'.Vel* Snail

* obndiisteiL i Witrtild- 'Shim

(A Wf fttW,! SffdM-oric-dra* fn -^-^ ^"-

B4W-lJi*body-l»Uf'KW«4t™^lSiti'tl**ttBiecitf»iSVaT'"" ■•A"""""' ■(""'■'"■1^ ■■■■ '■

t >

31^ nSiL OP'WfUOAK 7AlJrfiltl

Mr. Jiaiii«#.— "Where do you read that firom ? ' * '' ,^ ' '' ; ,'* ^ ;' "

Mr. Setitwd S'ice.^Xt ii la twa repoctt^ one Ia < The Timet/ aad W hem 4i idiotir
limid writer*! noteiL. - .,<..,

i.ognl CiUCTBHUb— Bea^rd'tagrs'it w«t lying alni^t aii.'t|>e bed.
Mr. SeHeant S^ee.-A 'did not allttde to Bainfbr^B exaid^iostioii f -ffiil' iHiuett^' WMt!

80 too. , ; .". ".vT*^: •; ...; '.;;'.;'^

Lord CAMPBZzXi.-^KoW then, the next witnees we Have Ulh. ua^UodCf' jC?^ p<!<?!3f^
of Dr. Bar land and the d(^MmaU» tJ^erein reftrred^ to were tfmt ilMf^^ X)r. Hsniuid'l^en-
dence fi certaixdy very i^tetl^ ^f titl^e^ i(iid !l «ed' igM i9:M(e,t|mt yim.f^y^j^f.
careM attention to it. . , .. ..'.'■ - ''.,•••.,•• /i-.-ir.;'''

The next witness is Mr. Charles John JDevonshire, who ^vlis present' at fhe epe^fl
of the body in November las^. ( T^te learned Jrtdgt read, the fiVfdfi'fpe cf Jfr. Devop^ijj^)

Mr. Sefjeant 8hee,—l tbiak tjip ifjjtne^s , said there ^wfr(^..tpus0ft'0f Afll^hygeiB^ Jw^^e

left lung. .,,.,...•,:.■...' ^ • : ■ *u .1. i'"m'' xmril
Mr. Babon AuuEBaoikr^Tes* 1 .. ; • / t> . T-^'f (u>::

Loid CAMrwBi&.-^Dr« fiionllloB is the ned witaweo. - (flb XdMM^'Mitf A»M<tiMJl^
(fj}r, Mtmitom, amduki»^*ktai€f'Mt4Bopd!iH mtd'J<ami§Ji§fatt,y' It te>idkf«iiWe'«de*f
£hat tUais evMenoe for yoils oamMsnAlita/bMiMtae'Ur A etMwf^ilfmHMlatiitlid eirfdhitfr
yvaioak a« IdM eondnttbaf the pirinr aosMed^ and cRxMlder Wbstlu* that •«NUltMt««MiMlli'
irith famoceB4ey or betnife/gallt.' Kern iSbme seenur no r aaes tt tirdiwbt Itie eildtatf'flP
tUapeer^oyi. A TpnobrHUmm, neidoo^t, "was ttada to alww thatit did Mft>riftr«l'
the |nr. but'to fafMOa^ Mr. Mrentc thai Mr. Stevede had been waAtoaly {liivlddif
M». JPlanuiveadtiHktBahnerttilgkt'beettBaaed if he eould gat him upsei on the Jommbj^i
I see no ground f<» saying that hs gave him any sueh ppwefeattoa ; ttnd if you MM9lh
the softtbey^tiia iaqiitrfwas afloat tftie jar, -and thai it was to upset; them wMf ttM jar.
^Qiis is nOtWglike dcNdttye proof of guilt, bst you wUl say wbeChar^tt aocMi wi*t
iaswcfMoeitiiat ha should aBtttr into this eenlrlTaiiea far pf a ven < Ai ^ tiie optM>«laliM!f of'
eaaminlng Hke eonthnts oCiha Jar, which might be vaed aa eivideoea against hitt.

. livw, sentieasisn, the- next witasia is Samuel Cheshire, who waa for aosaa yeanifost^'
maater at fiagekyv and he ai^ ttiat he oomes from Mewgats^ where ha le ntAtiag
punishment for hayinfr read a letter.- Now, reading a letter mmtb mean apesday a tsttet'
flia^paMad.thraogh. um pest-office, ha Tiolation of his duty^ ha beii^^poatmastef . {Bii
JtQrdAip tkeMreadaporiim eftk^mMeiiee <f itfr.> CftedUre.) Theft evidenee^ia gifeo^UM''
opffriing to tha miss of law, to show that tha ohei|ue came haeklnto the pemsusioii af4v
priaon^^ othsrwias w» da net attaw evldeBee to b» given of a written daemnent ubIm it
oanbatmaedio^e'oasto^ofdiepenaBagaiaBtiriiomitia addaoed, and Bir.Wetbe^)
^e secretary to the Jockey Ouby is recalled. {Bis Lardtfup read the eoideMe df w^

Wsiherhy.y Then they went through a form of law, f^owiag there had been a notice to
paodueetha'decumeat.reftrfed to,, and then the cheque isi daUed; ftr; It^ being tmetd t<^'
the ouste^y^f the prisoner- at the bar.. His not 'p^ueedy and* imonthe aHdeHoa of
Bergen yon will fihd thftt itoonU not be fmmd among the papsn at ida hooae. fhsi*
MrvChcahhre is recalled,. and hia evidenee is ae MAoiea; (lf» JJeiehAikiiiUd ^fto^
portion cf the eoidenee ef Mr, Ckeahire,} Now^ hist stop for a moment. We anist oomid^
wjletber there is evida^ea of tPaimer.89|in>pnaitiB8,to his wena nee the property of Op»1^
a!hd whether that cheque was a forgery. Agfin, .if« must pi^ whether £9 w«a tahang VkJ
benefit from Cook's death ; and if he was tampering with a memorandum of tbia tort,
pretending that it was fligned by Cook, and that it wasuHtneMied'by ChMIro fo ihe liib-
t&le oTOodc, hie eimeSed aHiutiiieu wonld b^ evhiekioe HM^Ife^wer tidelng absufefit
ftem the death' ef Coekt aiel the> ierf h t iae e wertldilead t a u^ ltaby «» that' etenldsftfla;
but all these are circumstances for your considirailtu^' dad^yed tfluafr 'farm yeereMi
q|^hilontnie»'thetn. The* he-saya, ^^thefprleutte'WiM kk ^elMWtr<rf oaUhsgftosMttn
imresesd to his mother.'" OfUiiiittheie^oanrbeiiodoiiht>t'the«»oanba<iiodaubtthith0
d<Hi!^i]Mdto:getthekMirs<«liatw<Me<<ir]fittaB'told* meOMt, OfChet^lBe hhi metheP^NW
loagi before havv becoma^sfMMiliited with! t h eaet to t g d iie e ; widehf trcMroetomlttedta hir
rieme^, beeauge it ii^te ifwar •'there 'iv«re:vMaii» ef^llettieui te herftr-pa js i nrf/ y
^ieh she was kept < iwi j^MMttM. tBiM iMfdmff #eekf « f hwW ji^^-ffae of ike evAieft!A>
A'lB quite cfeari)hat1i«wiM/tbihpeiittgiii4thltae'tfoa^^ dblatai^ liifoivetift

with respect t«whB^<I^.^hylor)iifidttt^''tHud^g«reoi^^ 'Hmb'^'

"^itnesftgees <m4o sity,^<*'Xh»ietter'foe)whloh\l am ntfiMngpwifahmtot weaker l^ttu^
ftem-Dr. THyl^rto w^; (kttdiiier, ttMLattemay e m ple y e a !^ Mr. flteeena:' iBULifmif
rMBl4ke remakui^ if M^ OmkU'^ tfeHlHiiei) (Ehea <}ap&hi' Battml, theohief mf^
i&tendent0fthe.petiteeW8tafibyd*lte(t8^ •< l'priewedthis4etter'aadeorelmB«iBr'
Mr. Ward the coroner;" tod thle letter fs.amoet Ihmsper lettsr, addresaedMliyw
pileoner to Mr. Ward the e oren t r, w^ie^icotumna jii^; It ed hdpptw that Innyi^
am the chief coroner of England \ but «11 the eoKeostS'ar* jedgse aarmuehael ukii w
ought with equal integrity and iddifllBeenoe tehdminletsB'theg hw«f tiw te e nftr yi^
0ays , •' I procured this letter andenveiepe IkeriaMr. Waidthe eerttter;'' thif lithe bMif'

Eixmrs 9A5; mr-'ae/iiiM: ai5

pendiag; sod it is not creditable to Mr. Ward to r«e4ivt aoeli • fetttt* vithont estpori:^
the person who wrote it. The letter is in these terms. ^£5«XoriM£preMft4ei^riar.) Be
mgf Iw an innooeBt man, hat raa wiU say whether this is condstent with ianoeence. It
is'iStetfr fiiPBi ptirf ug' with'tte wm^^ and sug^^estiiq^ nfo Terdictwhicn he should ohtain ftxnn
the jnry, whieh would have amoimted to a Teidiet of aoqoittal, instead of the Terdict
which they «d prontaHUsej wttsU mm mrttAWt ttf^wlMit ttwderMfutt hitn. Mr.
QMn|ia4^the» ncaOed. (I^Latdtk^ikm rtmdJtkt nmmi mt Jh r^Mr. OUUrv^teeufeaee.)
'Tltare » the eridenee of Mr. Cheshire, which is reiy material with regard to the cheque^
the nsraorandnm. and tf*t ^elosing of this tetter whloh was .written hj Palmer to Mr.
Hkw^'the c6syaer> * ' . " .' '

yyne nfttt <rttness is Wr. £Qis Crisp, the inspector of police at Rofeley ; he says^ ** on
tmPfct'of Ddeemhief I assistied itf searching the prisoned house. There was a sale of
thhs« on the 5th of January j I jgot this hook ^t the sale." Now that book is nOt here,

'iRf.' yame«:~'t^, my Lord. Q7%e Book teas hancteet to Mm Lordilkip,)

^'^Lord €Ax»BSt.u— This book has been laid heibre yoii In evidence, and eertainly I
think I need hardly beg of you to pey no r^ard to it, because it was a book that PaluMv
had when he was a surgeon, and at a time when I have ncr donht <he would have atenuik
^i5irt^Aeyos^eP¥SMeh.ariit»as thsjtwithiiiihicbt-ha isnhas»i fcte».>CHiey> Thereis,
u^Ati litU-faas»f tl>a b»oh» "SftfychnjaJttUshycaasiB^tota nw fc fii d ^g ^ the lesplretQcy
mwfplpsj" wmT in anothes pasft there is *4iSssnptieA.<»(.irhafe nax>viknM»ia, Md hov
slni^a^ is. ^Mideoad £eWR it; with these woida, '< stcMhiuit .kills- horcsMnes tslaaie
^SB«.^the. sespisatiiry mMOlsa." Acain^ I sijyv 4b«t I iM^ thte being:«owid in hie
pwopSPioi^ ousht not te weigh at all against tjift prispnerat thohest Xhere ssttlettar
^i^Qttttti in another book whiek was taken at the same ttsse; lMt,iu l>h^ive said hefera, I
h|i^«.no doubt that at that tisie he would have legarded with hejoNiriaiiy SKoh dime ee
tbit«ilfaiwlueh he stands chaived.

. Then the next witness is ^^zabeth Hawkea: she keele »>boacdiogi>heese at l(eu 7»'
B«f|QfQftBuikls^:s» Strand. (Bis LB0vbhip reml.tluimUkm€9<^Mr»*JMmik9i} Now this
by itself does not conneot the prisoner at'the bar withthis poseent; hmk in a>auhnsimwt
stage of the prooeedin^i, the porter was called, and his evidence X vidU.nowitfsad-to jreob.
H|s,])aa[|e is Sbdc, and he is porter to the last witness, who keeps a boarding-howfe.
{M^Ii^niiMp read the evidence tf Slack.) Therefore he has this giime, fish and tnikey put
up in a basket and directed to Mr. Ward, the Coroner.

JNow the next witness called is Mr. George Herring. Fiaher, in the natnval course of
thingSy if Cook was net eible to eene up onoa the settlmg'd^^waa the^peeson tobe
eqqyleyed to collect his bets, and he, at Coors reonest, had advanced 200/. nom iiia own
pecket upon Cook's eccount He wan not employed and Herring was; and Herring
giv«B ^s 'Soosunt. (BU Zord$h^ read the evidemee of Herrvng^ emd Ae lettere thetem
re fin ed to,y

•Then Boycott is recalled and proves the signature of the prisoner to one of the biUa»
and to the ether two as aesBptoe* The* Mr. Strawbridge is called, end he looks at tim^
\M dated Sth Ootober, 18&&, and says the drawing and endonement are in the prisonei^i
hmitlTTTriT^ ( T%e karmd Jud^fe read Mr, Bofc^e evidotee.) Then Herring is recaUe&
aad. he says it is endorssd by John Panoes Coek, ( I%e evidemee ef Mr, Berrimg ana YAcsT

.t »i

. - tfr. Serjeant Sfee.^TMs Will^ tho time, ttiy Lord, fiir the ottier bill to be put' iik,
widob Witt tDak<6 three 600ir. sHd thttde 2(K)£. bilb.

' X«ord Campbell.— If yp^pt^^e., . . , ,

The next vv^ea»4aaewce BsA^^ (JQyir Z^fiAA^^
Bamford's deposition sHKttStiU belatroduoedHatte fi#U Jie MMr^ sadUkswiwhia viotimm
examination, whlQhwiUoemft.ly>9sterk^; i*. . t .^ > . " .' i. '. '

I7ow, gentlemen^ yon aie ofl^«4 »pon to.iosiip yoinr epini^ft as to tha.opiniMijpf soisnjfo
t^c n%en respeoting the amsz«ftOe>o£ tih«<^yinptoBls ttMbt Cook exhibited^ SAd how m.
th^y can be aec<Mintedibr. oy neAanU disease^iSiidihow^^'ahiDyn^ea the •evide«eet they.
avQ consistent with stryohni^ whiSther tkh«9&«giiss> viAh iiniimmo.oviJMliapaihio. totaiMir
wtotevev it may be ; w whether. 4he symntJmsieerrssMnck wiOi a n^ursA diseese and^doi
ni>t.asrrespond with 9iiry6b»ia^i».^.mB^miimilMi yv^^ ^S*^ ^

censyder. Mr, Curling is the fixslr«^ieifian,eidta4is«dJie.fta^ a,fsU^. of the RqysC
Otaiege, of Surgeons, and si»|peDa3to&«»^l«iidon.9o8pM'. •iTke.tal^tme.qfMr.Cur^ltff,
Br. Todd, tmdthe depontm^ ff mr.\Baiiifcrd,'VMm ikm^t^.^ Now^ that wiU hsbtrodiMft
the wpa ^oM examination of Mr. iBomfi^ beeeasoryoe viHreeoUect^thatbewBs v«ry iUr
ykkaa that examinaliica was. read» and ivcts net <fiMe^ to. eoiBA>int«'i counk.^ but. he subset
qiwotly recovered, was esaminedy •od^gaive Oue e¥ld«oe. ^ {Bh JiordeUjx re^ »pt»^
of Mr. BamfmT* evidence.) Thisis mset^mpoirtont* besanas the prisoner sees the pilhr
mf^to jap^by Bsaford; tbey are delivered to hink, andhe.hes;tiieBS in-bispossession. He
cevtainly^had the opportitiilty of chaaeiag them. That Is an nbservation Uiat I feel it my
dntv ta submit for your consideratipn. Whether be did so or i^U most dcapend upon the
vii^Htf circumttances given ia /evidence befeie yov> which you will have the opportunity

ai6 TRIAL OF WILUAM PALMCfi.

of considering. (BU Lotdahip rtad ufmr^er ftortUmif Mr, Ban f brtf* evideate,) He 0k^
*^ I gave it as my opinion tnat he died from apopleiy, and I filled np the certificate
accordingly.'* lliere is not the smallest reason, I believe, to impute any bad faith to Mr.
Bamford, but it is allowed on all hands that he was mistaken, that it was a mistake to say
that death arose from apoplexy, because all the witnesses on -both sides say that it cer^
tainly was not apoplexy, whatever other disease it mlsht be. But, Mr. Bamford being
called upon to give a certificate, gave a certificate that the death was by apoplexy ; for it
IS necessary, as you are aware, under the recent act of Parliament^ that the cause of
death should be certified by the medical roan. ** Palmer asked me to fill up the certifi-
cate : I had the form of the certificate in my own possession ; on Palmer asking me to fill
up the certificate, I told him it was his place, as he was his patient, to have filled up that
certificate ; but he said he had much rattier I would do it, and I did it. I was present at
the post-mortem examination ; he did not say more." Then he is cross-examined, and he
says, ** My house is about 300 yards fVom the prisoner's/' Now this old gentleman,
turned of 80, seems to have acted with perfect good faith ; but he was mistaken os to the i

cause of death for which he had given a certificate. But now, gentlemen, we go on to |

The cross-examination of Dr. Todd. ( The evidence of the witness was then read.) There- <

fore, his opinion, according to the long report you have heard, is, that when the body
was examined at that time, after examination, any disease in the spinal cord might have
bectt (ttscovered. |

The next witness is a witness to whose opinion, he being a gentleman of high reputa-
tion and unblemished honour, you will pay great attention— Sir Benjamin BrMlie, and, I '
think I may say with the concurrence of my learned brothers, that he is probably the most
cUstinguished medical man of the present age. {ffi» Lordshfp read Sir Benjamm Brodie^s ^
emdence.') You will take into consideration the solemn opinion of this distinguished
medical man, that he never knew a case in which the symptoms that he heard described i
arose firom any disease. He has been and knoviii the various disca*cs that afiKct the
human frame in all their multiplicity, and he knows of no nattiml disease, such as will
answer the symptoms which he heard described in the case of Cook; and if it did not
arise from natural disease, then the inference is, that it arose fWmi other causes.
* The next witness is Dr. Daniel. He sajrs he has retired from the medical profession,
and was for twenty-eight yeavs surgeon to the Bristol Hospital. {His Lordship read the
evidence of Dr, Dimiel and Dr. Solly.) The next witness » Mr. Lee.

Mr. Serjeant Skee. — ^There is one answer, my Lord, which the last witness gave, which
we think important. ■

Lord Campbell.—- Bead it, if you think I have omitted ii.

Mr. Serjeant Skee.'-'We certainly think your Lordship rvads it rather short. <

liord Campbell. —Bead it by all means ; I have no doubt the report is a correct one.

Mr. Serjeant Shee. — Here is an answer which appears to us very important, indeed, |

about the risus sdrdonicvs. " Does it not frequently occur in all violent convulsiMis
which assume, without being tetanus, a tetanic form and appearance? Yes, it does.
—Are they not a very numerous class? No, they are not numerou8.-^Is it not very
difficult to distinguish between them and idiopathic tetanus? In the onset, but not. in
the progress. — I think you have only seen one cose of idiopathic tetanus ? I have only
seen one."

Lord Campbell. — ^Very well, you have read it, and the jury will say whether it is
important in their view or not.

Mr. Serjeant Shee. — Then there is another question — ^ Does epilepsy sometimes occur
in the midst of violent convulsions? Epilepsy itself is a disease of a convulsive cha-
racter. — I am aware of that ; but you heard the account that was given by Mr. Jones of
the tew last moments before Mr. Cook died? Yes, I did.^-That he tittered a piercing
^riek, fell back aad died; did he not? Yes."

Lord Campbell. — Mr. Lee is the next witness called, and he is surgeon to King's
College and the Lock Hospital. {His Lordship read Mr. Lee^s evidence.) Now, we have
given in evidence several cases of tetanus and convulsions from strychnine, and you are
to consider how far the symptoms of Mr. Cook resemble those, or T^-hether they resemble
the symptoms of ordinary tetanus, idiopathic or traumatic. Piret, we have a case from
Glasgow; the case of Agnes Sennet. Dr. Bobert Corbett is a physician practising at
Barrhead, near Glasgow. {His Lordship read the evidence cf Dr. Corbett and T'r. WaUon^
oJie of tJie PhyKicians of the Glofyow Infirmary. Dr. Patterson, and Mary Kelly.,) This,
gentlemen, is the end of the Glasgow case ; and now we have the Romsey case, that is the
case of Mrs. Smith, and to prove that Caroline Hickson is called. {His Lordship read
the evidence of the witness, and aim that cf Mr. Frcmcis Taylor and Mr. Charles JSlpxam.)
Now, here you have a very distinct account of a case certainly of strychnine, and you
will say how far it resembles that of Mr. Cook. The great question for you to consider
is, whether Mr. Cook's symptoms are consistent with strychnine ?

Now, we have the case vcom Leeds, which was an attempt, no doubt properly made,
that the name should not be published ; but as it has been so frequently mentioned, I do
not know that it need be now concealed ; it Is the case of Mrs. Dove, and what takes

£L£V£NXH »XY, Hat 26, im. 317

plftce hue Is not to wdpidioe MtY iVirth«r pxoceedi^gf 4hftt jmy arise out Qf that uufor-
ttuukte case. Jane Wiuam is called, and her evidence is as follows. (7%e evidence of
the witneat was read by hU Lordship.) This was a case, in which it appeaxs from the
symptoms, that there had been several small doses of strychnine given oefore the dose
was administered that finally proved fataL Mr. George M orley, a surgeon, is next
called. (^The evidence of tlie witness was read h^ his Lordship^ Kow, gentlemen, this is A
very important case, hecause it is a nase where there was death certainly t>y strychnine
however administered, and you will see how far the symptoms of this lady, to whom
several doses of strychnine appear to have been given, eorrespond or differ with or fttnn
those of Bfr. Cook. It seems she had an attack, uen reeorered fron it, and that then cm
the Saturday a larger dose was given, and that that proved fktal. With respect to the
Opinions which this witness gives, they are at variance with the opinkm of other scien-
tific and most' sincere witnesses as to strychnia being deeoBtpoaed in the blood. That
seems a vexed question among the most eminent t<xiieok)gitt8, and the material question
win be whether there may not be oases iHiere there has been death by strychnine and
strychnine has not been disoovered from whatever cause that may have been adminis-
tered. Now, Mr. Edward Moore is the next witness, and this refeft to another case of
strychnia where there was an over dose. ( The evidence of the wUmeas was read by his Lord'
«^E>.) This being a ease certainly of poisoning by strychnine, yem will eeoslder how tiur
thatlliay be supposed as eorresponding with tiie symptoms of Mr. Cook on the Monday
night, and his recovery ftom them.

The next witness is Dr. Taylor. I am much afraid, Gentlemen, that it is impossible
to finish this case to-night, but it is very desirable that we should fi^sh the evidence for
the prosecution, and then I shall be under the necessity of adjourning the Court and
asking you to attend to-morrow morning, when fGod willing) this invest^tion will come
to an end. Dr. Taylor's evidence is as follows (his Lardddpread a portion of the evidence
of Dr, Taylor), Now, Gentlemen, here is something most important for your considera-
tion. You see it is very properly reliea on on the part of the prisoner, that though
strychnia may be' found in the body by analysis, none was found upon the analysis which
was made by Dr. Taylor and Dr. Bees, for they, and they alone, experimented upon it,
«nd they could find none. We know that experiments were made bv those two indi-
viduals, and they say that so far as their skill goes there may be death by strychnia, and
yet that strychnia cannot be detected. But Dr. Taylor and Dr. Rees state experiments
that they made where the death had been by strychnia, which they themselves adminis-
tered ; and in at least two of those cases where there nad been death by strychnia they
could discover none. Now it is possible that other diemists and other medical men might
have discovered strychnia in those animals, and might have discovered strychnia in the
body, or in the jar which contained the stomach of Cook, but they found none in their
analysis. They found none also in at least two cases where they killed animals by
strychnia, and afterwards did all their skill enabled them to do for the purpose of dis-
covering the strychnia. (JUs Lordship read a further portion qf the evidence of Dr, Tct^lor.)
I thought at one time that these examinations were made with a view to snow that if the
pills prepared by Mr. Bamford had been taken as he prepared them, that mercury ought
to have been found in the body of Mr. Cook ; but I think that was not presseo, and I
should think that it ought not to have any influence upon your verdict — there was no mer-
cury found. There was mercury in the pills which Mr. Bamford prepared, and which
Cook ought to have taken, but the simple lact of no mercury being found in those parts of
Cook's body that were examined ought not to have any influence upon your verdict ; but
that of course you will judge of for yourselves. {His Lordship read a further portion rf the
evidence of the witness,) Then the learned counsel in cross-examination read a passage
from Orma about a dog who had taken antimony, and some fow minutes afterwaras anti-
mony was found in the bones, in the fat, and in the liver. {His Lord^p proceeckd to read
the evidence cf Dr, Tayhr^ and also the letter written by Dr, Jhylor to Mr, tfardiner.) You
will bear in mind, gentlemen, that was written before the symptoms were known to Dr.
Taprlor and Dr. Rees, but they had been informed that prussio acid and strychnia and
opium had been bought by Palmer on the Tuesday. They search for all these poisons
and they find none ; but thev swear distinctly that they found antimony in the bodv, and
therefore, in the absence of me symptoms, they do not impute the death to strychnia, but
they sav it may possibly have been produced by antimony, because the quantity they dis-
coverea in the body was no test of the quantity that had been administered to the deceased.
{His LordMa read a Jurther portion of the evidence of Dr. Tayhr.) Then a letter was read
which Dr. Taylor wrote to ttie * Lancet,' and I must say that he would have done better
to have abstained from taking any notice whatsoever of what was said about him, but you
will say whether what he did write materially detracts from the credit which would other-
wise be due to him. I think the passage in tnis letter in the ' Lancet,' which was relied on,
is the last passage which I will read to you. He explains what his evidence had been,
and complains of the reports that had been spread abroad respecting him, and then he
concludes his letter thus :— *' In concluding tnis letter I would observe that during a
quarter of a century which I have now specially devoted to toxicological inquiries, I
have never met with any oases like those suspected of poisoning at Rugeley. The mode
in which they will affect the person accused is of minor importance compared with their

X

ill

rtatt or wiu.nji ntuiL

I

^gaeohMid iolkiaiioe oo fodelj. I bsve no bfltitatioii in nvine tiurt fbe latere teeniitj
of life in this country will nudnly dq>end on the judge, tne Jury, and the coouflel, who
nay haTe todifpose of th« ishnrgef of mfirdor wjboob bav* arisen out of these InTSStt-
gations." I again Si|y th4t 1 tKinklt ^otid liave *b«en^ MUdr iT ha had trusted to the
0redi^ which he had already acquired, instead of writing a letter to tiie * Lancet.;* but
it is for you to say that he having Wmi, as he says, misrepresented, and writing this
letter to set hinaself righ^ whether that materially detracts vom the credit wideh u due

Mri Byjo m nl Sktrn Ho. doss rnoi .oon^plain of jme^ misiatfgew ey ^a t i i yn ; .ho V«KW8 ^
«ayiqn *^'I haw^imuih yiaasurt."

liOrd CjtimsBL.— j san'going to<itat» wlait^foUows : hesa^is, ^ I vrnwhomr^libit^wt^
portrait had iMen taken 'tefths *{Iliistrated I'imea/ " {Hi8,Jb9iMiMnnmd m'pmthm^BiL
Tavld/s eMm^,) The remit scettis toiwam tfait 'the •editor ealkd mftmtbam'miikM 9na(
and, aoeo»di«g to Us stateBtent, he gave leave for the fvil^lieatlon -of a qpskvt^ slciWiHg
out everything, aahe aay% tfaatvonoarosd the Rn^sley oase^ and. this i»«iu4ia«Mid
to have isppeared tn the 'Illustrated Times.' (Hit L»dtktp rtad the ifwmamdn tf £tu
!rby2bf*« nridmee,) that is the end «f Dr. Taylev*a evident. N«k, getttlemao,! eiUl
not at all ttuam eiit on It. Yon see the importanoe of it 'Wdtfa •regspd to fiad^ At
antimony in the body; trith regard tty^heexpariments for atsyohqUthsife heanadir;swd
the iact that in the animals which he himselr had killed i>y strynlmiae, aoi stiiyrlwif
could be 'found.

Then Br. Reel 'fitOows, aad^e 'corpobogates the o^denae given by Dt. TaylU!. Be
isaF^llowc>ftbeGolle|eof Surgeons, and Leotnrer on liatcaia^M edioa at G«n% Hm-
•pltal. (The teideiMe'4>fDr,- Ren mtuvead bfhm lanUnga.} Heae, AfaBsafaref .is &. lUai,
whom no 6ne can suppose to- havean inteBeetin the natter^ Moaot Jcnownvhat intapsst
~t can be siippoied that Dr.'l^ytor iMuiia the matter, for he was legnlaily eaqplojsd sn
lis juroftMion ; he knew nothin|r about Mr. Palmekr until he«vss aalled tfn lagr Mr. Stewavs
tc analyse tbe eontvnte nf«the ^ar^ lie had -no animosity againsSr-him, and.ao.iirilemst
l^hatever In 'mftrepresenling the masten

Hr. Serjeant Shee.-^Ue said that the es^periments v^i^h the t^o rtibUts were -made
^fter the ini^uest.

Inind C4Si9«iif)i..^ Certainly: it cannot matter whether fhey were made before or
^aftes, if t^«y axe fitnesses of truth. It is the case that there was the death of the
«S(npMils by stnrchnine, and that after death no strychnine could be found in the
.^wiwala; juodif thcej^perimentf had been made this moirninj^:, the effect would have been
•the same. Dr> Taylor baa been qifeationed about some indiscreet letter which he wrote
•to the ^.Itstneat,* and som^ indiscreet conversation which he had with the editor of the
( Ahistsatad Times ;' but, with regard to Dr. Rees, tiiat imputation does not exist, and
'he eoncuss with. Dr. Taylor in the evidence that the rabbits were killed b^ strychnine,
Mid'thiat although they did everything in their power, according to their skill and know-
ladge^ to (tiacpver the strychnine, as they did with regard to the contents of the jar, yet
no strychnine oauld he found. (iTu Lordship read tke widence qf Dr. IRees.") You will
judge tBom 4he von>iting that took place at Shrewsbury, and afterwards at StalTorid,
wither ^antimony may have been ai ministered to Cuck at Shrewsbury or Stafford.
Antimony may not produce deat^ ; but it is part of the transaction, and deserves your
delibanata consideration. He concurs with Dr. Taylor that there were cases in which
anim als were poisoned by strychnia, and in three qases .they ware unable to discover it
alter death*

Xha naxt witness is Mr, Brande, ProfesM)r of Chemistry at the Boyal Institution.
{Hi» Lar4»k9P read the evidence of Mr, £rande and of Frqfes^or phrigtiaony whom his Lord-
ship etatedwas knoam to be a mott skilfvl and honouruhle vtcm.) Then cpmes the last wit-
aese, Dr. John Jackson, who is a member of the College of Physicians. This is with a
viewtp show what is the common course of' natural tetaniis, whether idiopathic or trau-
matic. {Mis Lotdthfp read tlie evidenoe of Or., Jackson,)

Kow, gentlemej^ 4his, I believe, is the whole of tAe evidence upon the ]ffixt of tile
piosecutioA, and we w^l), therefore, npw atyourn until tormorrow meaning.

'5Rb Cotirt adjourned at a quarter peat eight until ten dcibek to^momw.

TWELFTH

TmmrtBiuAr^mm m nam: Hf

___ • i» •'. til

TWELFTH DAY'g TEIiJi. , \ :;

'Mat*27, 3856. > - v, . ,ji t .•• n. m

Lord Gaxfbeu:.. — Gentlemen of the jary, at the a^oarnment of the Court TeiAMQa^
i^etAag I had firdshcNft fhi tiriik of IftlThig benire yon A the evfiieiiMmt'tlit^plrt 4f m
prosecution ; -and certamly that case, if not answered, does prescM'fiBryonr oonsfdoMtkili
fi Aerioas case mgaanaiS the ptiaoner at the bar. k appears that in the middle of November
Ite was inrohrad in necilniaty difllctflties of the most ibrmidable nature : he bad engage-
AMOts to perfbrm that he was unable to perfbrsi without some most extraordinary exf^
idients-; he had io make payments for vrbMi he was unprepared; there were actions
^iroaght against botii himself and his mother upon the fomd acceptances : he had no
credit in any quarter imon which money could be raised. It so hf^ppeaed that at th&'t
time 'Cook; the deceas^fL by the winning of the race on the ISth November,' became the
ittaster of at least 1000/L, and there is evidence ftom whieh an inference may be^ra?;7n
'^mt-tixeprisoner'fuim^the design of appropriating that money to his o^ use, and thi^t
lie Is px^^mred -to do whatever was necessary to acoomplish that object. There is some
crvidence that ne did appropriate that money to the -payment of debts for which he alone
^nis HaUe. There is evidence*<lirom which it may be, inferred ihathe drew a cheque in
liie name of Cook, whieh was forgery, upon which to obtain payment of part of the
money whion was due to Cook and there » fnrtlier evidence that he employed Herring
'to ooliect money on the Monday iaad to appropriate it to his own Use. What effect "woM.
haver been produced by the surdv&l- of Cook, under such circumstai^ces, you are to
^consider. However, it appears timt £rom Cook's death he contemplated the advantaj^
of obtaining possession of the horse Polestar which had belonged to Cook ; and you
have evidence of his having fabricated a document whieh was to declare ,that certain
bills of exchange with which it a^ears that Cook had no concern were negotiated for
Cook's advantage, and that the prisoner at the bar had derived ho'ben(*flt from 'them.
Gentlemen, that was brought fbrward after Cook's di^ath, and if Cook ha,d 46t*viyed,'thiit
fraud must have been exposed, and might have 'been pilhishctt. Then^ g«lta(tl^men^' witih
respect to the joint liability of CoOk and Pftlmer, Which It is saiid wouKt now' be thi*dwn
"entirely upon Palmer, that wtis rather a distant object ; and if Paliiifer hStfi gotpoMessien
of all C«K>k's property by the means that he resorted to, he would iiot have been a suffilMr
by his death. Then, gentlemen, as to the important question wh^ther^ Cook must' be
supj^osed to have died by natural disease or by poison. You have 'the ^evidence of -Sir
Benjamin Brodie and otoer most skilful "and honourable men, who -say tiitit ia their
opinion he did not die ^om natunll disease; they know no natural disease in* the whole
catalogue of diseases which attack the human frame wMch Will account for tlhose symp-
toms. Further, gentlemen, the witnesses go on to say thAt they believe tbM^fhe symptoms
that were exhibited by Cook were the symptoms of strychnia, that they were what woold
he expected from strychnia^ and that, comparing those symptome with i^tixral tetantts,
■^ey do not correspond with it, but they do correspond M ith the symptoms brought on by
a man being poisoned by the administration of sttychnia Then, gentlemen, Wfth respect
to the consideration that no strychnia was found m the 1)ody, that is tot yon to considery
and no doubt you will pay great attention to it; but' there isno point Of law according
to which the poison must be found in the body of the deceased ; and all that we know
respecting the poison not being in the body of Cook is, that in that part of the body that
.was analysed by Brs. Taylor and Rees they found no strychnia. But witnesses of glreat
j-eputation have said. Dr. Christison among the number, that under certain oiroum-
fitaiices, where there has been poison by strycrMine, they wouM- not ^expect the sti^chnine
should be di3tected ; and you have the' evidence of Br. Taylor and Dr. ^es, who made
J the examination, that they having experimented upon ai)^iitial9'k)ll<ed by strychnine, which
they themselves administered, and by rtsorting to thfe same m tons that they hud em-
ployed in examining the body of C6ok, no 'strychnia could be fbitnd.

I'hen, gentlemen, with regard to the length of time that occurred between the alleged
administration of the strychnia and the time that tlie syraptoins appeared, the evidence
seems to me to lead to this conclusion, that although where it is administered to animals
with a view of making experiments and with aviewof observing-its operation as quickly
as possible, it generally operates more rapidly than in the human frame when it is put in
the shape of pills, and that will depend upon the manner in which those pills are com-
pounded, likewise looking to the state of the health and body of the person to whom they
are to be administered, and whether there may or may not have been any previons tam-
pering with the health of that person. Instances are referred to where, even in die
human body, a greater space of time has elapsed than in this case between the adminis-
tration of the poison ana the symptoms which were exhibited.

Mr. Serjeant Shee»^l think that is not so upon the evidence, my Lord.

Lord OAHFeBLEM^rThereare.instaaoes referxed io in whiAh it has been detected ; there

X 2

• ♦

lH^«ibe«iv>t«ll«d=ti^iK« it appcurfi HuM-tli^ t/S^lt^ Ibfa, HMt^tft^^a^ihitr pMtiiic^t^
Aft viMMieilori'of His MS^IrMoryotgatis, ptodming ispS^tA. ffte blood 'ts ftuod in tfa)^
iKMiri; "btA if it tfepypdueed lyy m «p«sm upoar the Iraart itMif, Hife If^ftrt contracts th^^
MbM Ift AK^Iled^' and lU^ bki^d ill found amr defttfr: Kow, takinft *^ «videhee befox^
us,, there are two instances 'where that took place. ; . -

*^' 'Their, f«6dN<0DB^n;'%e hftrVe to took to 4die evidence as it (inplicafed the ittisoner at
bay. You tnUst eonsid^ the evidence, to -show that lie must have tampered with tl^'
ft^R;b<of the deoeaeed, by administering something to him Sn the brandy 'Sin^^water, i^
ibebt^jth; and-in tfae^ other things which were Administered to him al Rugeley.' <>n«
pbrt bf tl^e broth was t^ken by Elizabeth Mills, as she swears, and 'the' iHmsi^uenc^
ifhk^ ibllSWed, according to her evidence, and the evidence of Lavlnia Bimes, was,
IJ^t'iSib was taken ill ttith a vomiting in the stomach as Oook the deceased- had been. -
'': '?hei|, gentiebien, yott have antimony found in the body of the deceased ; ahtiiponSr^
vthibh '#ou1d show' that tartar emetic, producing vomiting, iiad' been adnunistered, ^na
jlt'liseibl^'tp be <$le«r1y proved that that substance was fetfnd in his body-^^fix)m what source
VoA ^ to say itbm tne evidence before yeu. '' , " - '.;

* Tlien, gentlemen, comes tb^ moi« direct evidence that the prisoner at 4he bar,'. If yoit
bi^Tvftvis ^e witnesses, procured tHs very poison on the \tanday and on the Tuesday;-^
thrte'graini T fhkik dn* (he Monday, and six oh the Tuesday. .For what |Hirpose triS
^at obtained ? The evidence of ^e witness who swears to the poison being obuine^'-o^
the Motida;^ is frnpea<ihed, but no impeaohment tests upon the evidence of the witoe^
Hkhb swears to tSie poison hieing sold by him on the iNiesdajr to the prisoner at the ban
Toii haVd no account of that poison : what was the intention with which it was purclmse^
'^d'Wh^t %ss the appHcatioti of it, you are to in^. Then, gentlemen, it is }mpo$sibfe
fhatf ybu shofuld not pay attetitioh io the eonduct of the prisoner at the bar, and there
^e sbfi^ instances of nls conduct, which you will say Whtfth^ they be^dtig to what mi^f^f
b^ «xp^ct«d nrotfr'aif iihf»oc«&t or a guiHy umA. He wis ea^r to have Hke body l^tene^
do^vn in the coffin. Then, with regard to the bet^g-book, there is eertainW evfdtnca^
;I^Mybich' j6u ma^ ittfer ^ai he did get possesdeit of ihe beUing-book, that i;e
Abstracted- it itnd'eoneiea)ed it.' Tiien^'. gentlemen, you tonAt not omit hih conduet'in
trying to bribe the postboy to overturn the carriage in which the jarwas being convey^c^
.to be analyi^ In Iiondon, and from which evidence might be obtained of his gttilt:
[Again, you find him tampering with the postmaster, and procuring from the postmasf ^
i3ie opening of a letter from Dr. (Taylorj who had been ezanbtning the eontenfs of tfi^
Jar, to Mr. Gardiner, tbe ^ttorhey Miployed upon the part of Mr. Stevens. And ihett-

rntle^en, you have tampering with the coroner, and trying to induce hiih io ^rotnn^
vf rdicft from the eox'oner's Jury, which "would amount to an acquittal. ' ITiese '6.tt
seriouii matters for your consideratibn, but you, and you ahme, will soy what infereiiii^
'^ to be drawn Urotu them. If not answered, tbey oertainly present a serious' case '^
.Yonr consideration, tt is for you to siLy whether the answer is satisfactory. Either ydi
may beof<^piinott that the case on the part of the prosecution is insuffidenf. x>r^'^o^
n)a^ be of opipion that the answer to it is satisfactory. . ' V '^'

:Tt)efti gentlemen, that answer consists of two parts.: first, of Che mtidicid'efidekcer
'ftiid;socond]y, of the evidence of facts. With regard to the medical evidence, I Yami
say that there were examined on the part of the prisoner, a number of gentletri^HMT
high liononr and solid IntegriH^ and proved sciehUflc knowledge, wlib canl^' «ere
only to speak the truth and assifit in the administration of jwtice. Ton isi^yWe^
oniniou tnut others came, ti^ose object was to jn-ocure an aequittal of the prraoi '
Ojentlpmen, it is material, in this due administration of justice, that a witness' die
'not be turned into on adfvdeate, anymore than an.«dyocate should be turned into^
Witness. Ji is fbr you io say, wbether wime of thoi^ Who wferfe called on the ;^^ t$f
"tiie prisoner, did not .belong to tbe -oftC^gbr jr viSddk'l'desctl&ed-tis wit&teses l^etotbSH^
advocates. ,. ./•..•-• -•.';. i-J-

Gehtl^^, t^e ^t Witness bn ifiis' palH; of the-tii9s<h)eie''W^'%.^<Mii»*K^B^fIei

tie given to it He certainfy seemed to me -to give his evideiictj in it Mflbiner ndt'^i^
becoming a witness iaa coutt pf justice, 'but you wiB give'aB frtleritlon tutbefi*ttstb
-Which he refers in the evidence h&gavls. fie differs vei^ inia^^fllv ift hid ^(^fHI
Vpfnion from s«fVera] of the witnesses who were examined on-fh& ^rt i^tMi pt^Sse^J^!!^
lie speaks o^ there beii^ an ex^raoxdinary rigidity of the body after ^^tifH, WBJft'**^*^
.Itas S^enafeatti brth^(h^9S^(ion,-^ith i>tger symj^tbb^ aiM h^ JLttiBdhiis^er^ye^^
^pottan<ie tb th^ heltn IbeSng 6mpty, but you will say wUslPwelgM bti^ht tb l»b iimX!(»
toWsbpWInn.. - -'-"t 5-?'... ,'- • - -^ it ~...T^'. V. .vo/l- ^yO .tli

* '"^frAiflittt^ ^4tfiP^iSti,^m^Mt'of^^9^M flJ^<Bri§for>>^MIeafB^taMriB4^^

Tj^jti¥ smjutif^WKiimt m^

ff'f'^M i

je then read me remamder of the witnexes evtaence). I^ow, g^nt-lsinen, Mrf ^J^ ^

is a very skilful chemist, aad, I have no doubt» he spoke sincerely what he .thougH't ^ _.

"what was his opinion, that when there has b^M deim^ by ^ft7bbnHie,«trych*iii&«^^ to

Im discQyflrfd^ h»Ht ae^m\^t^V9$fWM^^^^fmmov^rm^ )l|sfkitbcare

[i4ght have. been. iUyjcb^i^ vni that IH Xi^Qr <ii4 not iwe thft iwpf^ri nsapti^ detonft

' , ,:^qw, tifa|P».^i4F f;fi(iiB9c# jthat we J»^^fl ia thi^ <|«0e.^t:thi»c« wf^ noVMryolnMiie kh

^9 ana^ys^.by JJtn 9:«^^i(.fpidi' J>i. ;aees. ^at.they^d^d ^ot.di^e^vfijr U- M^A puftNit

pioiinted out to o^opin ^Wj^ oi(^ cases, jinw^h. there, o«rtoioly!h(4))?A^PRiaoi«i|«.lKf

strychnine, the result was tiie same— they eould.xu)t.(|^ncovQT' it,, .<.,{'; i .<>.•• • -^ tmiu , -^i

^ , TJUea,|the,ii^xtijirii]|fpfiif,^c, iipgflSt pirofesspr of cfa[emisgry at.^^< Qp^fm^fi ^timi of

M^dicif^e, isi,u>»^n.^ kan^ Jfwalge iftadJhfi emdeneti a^ Mr, J^aife^i^ , .JHov|r,.lhis ifib#.

gentleman whoup ^vere see^s.^ioreaspn to 4oubt<;.t]^6 #eenis np x^a^on tit^x^uJ^I^

tfuiifi tliat hQ,9ta^d, and tiiatkha doies sincerely eiixertain ti^ opinion ^Vhfi wpFj9Ss«i|^

SM]^d>, according to his. evidence^, where there has beep 8^ycjbpiin&rQ>ixeii wJiMi 4ppiWf

Qtattejr^itm&y b^ expected that it would be detected l^ pkiliuL experimeyita^t^^ a,nd bv

tifiiog tj»e proper. tests>. Thep Pr, Letheby is called; £s is th^ m^cal.olficeir.of hec^w

to ihe city of jUondon, aiid of the London Hospital (the leam^ Jutiff^rmdi ^Ae.eqMfev^ of

fijr, Lfitli^^y, Kow thel|»■.ge^Ui9me9, I doubt not ths>t Djf. Letl^eW speaks', ^q(^X>

^iHlacoorcUng tQ his expepe^ce ^aad cipinios,.but he ^es iMty truly tW 0Mes,>T<M;}[ veigr

much, and that there may be cases which he ^Us ** exAeptionaL" allu4iiU( P^^ t^^A9^% O^

^e^lajdy i^t Uovmy y.jMuC^t 4oay probably be the fair result, toatt^noij^g^ of thip dl^easd

u 90t known to he aware of- all its varieties, and that any peculiarity that may, #mtf

l^ra there. is, stioong^iproJbMibiUty of stjrychmqe havij^been adn|ini8jt^re4 woiU^.nptiRf

^ythii^gt ^M coi^lusive, evidence to lAbut that result .i . .> ti. tt

. . Xhen Mr. £U)bert Qray,, fi n|{»mbe£ of tha Qollege of Suigeoi«y i^s, entwined (i^. mnm

J!iMJff^kerereafi,tbe,^v»fiieftc^afjjlr. Grajf). ^0]»'4g«»tlefpQn,,i«wyqi^W«^CW5>^Fli?*^^^

oalled idiopathic tetapvs; but you are to say, whether iTom-tW^ 2t'^<9^innsi; 'tbl^VW

illness of ^Jlr. Cookr wasi j^i)#thi<r tet^^us. . Th^ sre^t weig]^}. o^ evid^e x^ftm^ ^q v^i^ tp

s^w that it was pot idiQp^t^ snymisr^ th«a tr»mYa%tii?^te(«(9u%r bi^t!that.w)2|»tQK^ ff^s:^

of disease it might b«^ it.wo^l4A9tbeM(>f»^« tp^^^niis; j^yGuwiU fifi4:mt t««tl^ni^

ip^ vary znoJBt materially -in. thqir appeanp^ ^nqm , tj^a cs^ that M^^ ^^jtaiiled, W thip

4uratiouasw^U.as thertestottheoowncpf^v^s. .. i. ../t. », , r >

. , ., The next witnesathat was.csjUbsd was M;r. 3rown Boss, ftopaeHBurgjeon ta t^e Iipp4o?

Mo^itaJ, (7Ae learned, ^v4sie,re«kd the epklfme cfMfi Iio9$.y. Kow».geot^ei]|iea, J 49- no^

Imow for what j^iurposa the csae aUuded to by Mr, Kpfs.was brougl^t.beiqfe yQl]^ ujilpp^

tq lead to an ia^ar^nce thiat-J^r.. Cook's wjbs a case of tetanus of .^e sa^ae sort>»'ith thjj^,

wjhich ia here described,, because thvi wss tetanup ; aqd I fui^SjQ it. ^as in^^sy^oq ^^

fW are to infer that Mr* Cook's was of th« smpc; ^escfiptipn ; but whether yojo^ci^U ijt

if^opathie or traumatic, it was a case of t^taQUS*— V^ dirf^ctly to oe ascri)>ed ^V^^up^

which were upon his body^ and which are h^e described. Ko such wounds w^e upo:;^

thp body of Mr. Cook ; «nd other witnesses wbix ^ere examined Qp the parf qf the^ 4efence

iiay th^t this was not a o«se of tetaj^us at all; but th9n,.,eveM in this, case tliajt;h»s,beep

Kuibed. you see there, were the symptoms so nearly fq[>proachin|[ thoseof strychpin&

^t ^tqrcknine was suspected, but there was no ground fqr it; and in the case descijibe^

>^e.was. no gcQ^nd lo^ supposing strychnine co^d by pofsibility be the)C«iii|e^^

leath. . ^ , , . •>.!•..?

,y.the^ thf next witness is Mr. ManteU; he speaks to the same case. He. is on/c 'of the

l^pii^-prgeoM of the X^ondon Hospital, and. he says, *^ I saw the cs#e spolfiei^ to, by tl^

^^.jYi^tQess; he died iof tetanus j^roduced by t^e sai?s pp the arm." • • /i ,

,.,., ^o1l)r then, gentksmeuy the next witness is a fitness worthy of all prai^ for the«iK-

«^4ty which he exhibited, I mean, Dr. Wrightson. ( T%e Uarued Jvd^e reo^d the evidence of

pfl, Wrigldwuny l>fow» gentlemen, tnis witness, wno,! have no doubt, is,« most scientiJQLp

fVQ^ a very honourable ^ap, speaks, aa ar mftn of ,sciep9e,^ and, accprding tq h^mt ^

poison wo^J4:be fpuodtJn.thf), bq<ly ; but ,h« 8p^s,witk prqper cai^tioo,, apd, upon, his

ievi49iice,yon ovgh^ to sajr. wJiitsiher, un^er p^^tic^lar dicumstapces^it^^t not be, cU|-

cp^firable, or whether, tl)p^SWSMI sfeking/or itm^t i^to^mp^oy the:BVppfur;me(|08fqr

detecting it in the body. ., ,, . i.„

.„ jThe»,«omf#.Wr. ?^^idg9,,«jaH^t s^SBflctf^genj^l^mAayivhv^W he ^^Jbeejn many

jem:s in pracUce as a surgeoKi, and is processor of anatomy at. joangf CoUeige, (7Ar

UttJiynfid Judffe jrea4 the .^vf^fnffie. ^,^r» /'or^/H^ . ^,ow, gentlemen, yp^ Ihave ;|?e]|r«|,.tl^

^pinion of a very ;respectable witness as to thediilerent topics that he touches^ upon ; and

.th^ most impertant.one is, thatM thinks that the^ symptoms that were exhibited did not

jeacreapon4 with what }is ^epld expiect from str><mmne ;. but be speaks fxpvt^Mk pwji

pxpegence,; a#dyoahave4t from the other witAesnes that the symptoms vary consid^iramy

< .Tbe. next mUfiw^ i» \^f^ JohniSay) al^eUovr; Qf the |totyj4. QoUegp of Sprgeoni^ an4
j9itrefi»P ct#^«rlipyia.J^,;^ospit»l. , . (^TJ^*kf*t^.4wfs». then read, th evidence,, ^
Mr, Gaff). Now, gentlemen, this tvsis a case, you'se^, of tetanus arising cram the toe

.Miip. mtt^9ikk'.w^i\iWfmi *p Wv *Ww»»>>ir»o^ **9»S''» jw* f^ ^'^ jpoiv>,'own

smimv^ iipoB iV.b«wtiiBp av^iocy icjmUvjur tp,^(;ase pf .Qook, ndth ir^giod ^ whp^ no

SuCu CSuSv CCniKL D6^8MJ|^0II; S^^Oy fXaXKniWU^ acvK^Wf WJUnlo^fVjfUm^SnmAj UISI'IIF

to^^crWmt of ft ^vttn ststc oF tetftnlift it V^bt^d ve tfkftvos^y WSttvUt, W not iinpoBnllltoi^
^^fflioat ciiltftienil ^rfdeiiw, to ftsccflH$ Ac tettinfc * dlMSftM to* my iiHktiM ib the tiAiieuOe' tor
any evidence as to the GMtte.- Bat yoa wiQ form yonr own opinion upon it. He ssys,
tntbout eollatenil evidence it wonld be difficult, if not imponroie. Therefore TOn are to
ipok to ooHateral evTdenree ; andtf tHir ctiflatertil eridenee wtmlif im^te ftttifymftitiam
af'tetaadc convalsfoni^'tb any t>artitAdk^ cau^, necDiding to l!Bl$ witness fliaC eatne mirr
be aMigned. tlu^t T sa^^ with a view to getwUat It cfcHWHie inbral «Tid«fnce iirtft
regard to tha conduct of a particular person, and with r^gaild tawUftt lie m^ intve done^
or what he may have had in his pnfesession.
' ^dw comeft l>r. M^onaM. (The learned JiOae thiH fead the ^t^Sknce of'Tyr. 3^DontM
and ike documents referred to therein^) Then, here ia* tfce evid^nbe of Th: M'I>onal<!^
ttid you wilT observe that he gives an account of experiilientt lie made fbr the prisoner,
ttnd you win see the lengths to' which he goes in adopting a newfbrm bf dhrease m
epilepsy with these cOmpneations. He says tHat this might be; and he belieires fbttt ft
md, from mental excitement, or from moral excitement, or from senstta! exctteAiettt*^
aAd you ai^ to say what weight ydu give to«that evidence, compart with the witnestnH
who have given evidence before you.

The next witness is John Bainbridge, Doctor of W e dtci n^* and 'Medical Officer at
SI. Martin's Worlthouae. (Ute learned Judge read Ike emdenee xff JW-. BuhArktyifty
The object of this witn^s's 'evidence seems to be io indhee tidn to Iwheve that this waH ii
case of epilepsy, and from the symptoms you wfli- say WHedieir'yoa csncome totlMt
OOnehision.

Tlie next witness is'lVr. Bdward Steady, a Membet df Ute CbR^ of Surgeons, im
practice at Chatham. ( TVte learned Judge then read the evidence ofM^. Steady.') The
dase referred to by this witness seems to be a ca»e of trtmmatle tetanns; and you wiflL
say, if it were idiopatbic, whether the^ course of ft in the slightest degree resenrbles tlie

ntoms of Coolif the deceased,
be next witness is Dt. RobTmson, a very respectftbte g erft l fe tann , who is alieenfiiite
<tf the Koyal! ^ottege of Physiciand/andPHySfcfiaA tbithe Newca«t!e-on-Tyne BispenM^
and Fever Kospital. (The learned Judge then read the evidence ofDr: HdWwon). Ifow,
gentlemen^ you have this respectrtle pWySrtcian, who ^ves' an aecount from wbieh y&a
are called to infer that Cook's case was a case- of epilepsy. H^ says he should only teke
it td be e^lepsy !n the absence of evfdbnce of strychnine being- adminfttefed. He ssya
that all the symptoms described by Jones on the Tuesday mght are consistent wfm
st^chhime ; and, with regard' to" epffepsy, lie says no case wliere epilepsy had eziMSsd
iPDuld cause death without a loss of conteionsnen. Cook^ you Wiir remembet',' itmmined
oonpcious td the last^ attd you will say wh^her, upon the evidence that is laid beftafreyoo,
there was or was nbt what is called itf medical language a bending of I3ie body, vHyeh
id character?stic of tetanus, and what the witnesses have described as-being filom ttlB teitt
With ejpilepsy.

' The next wltne^-'fs The. Ittclhirdson. who wbtw brfnes in, for tfte* ftst time, angina;
pectoris as a disease of which' It may be nte^mmed €ooV' die^; i^t& eeidemx «f
Xh: Jtichard»cfn woe thien read by Hh Lordshfp/) IfHaw; geilllemen^ yott bav« 'to attend
tb this case; the witness, who seems 'm6st' hifchly ref§>eetBble^ mys tHia ease- beimr
d^tatlM by him, thb symptoms were eo^sistter with stiyehalne, and' that, if he IhM
known as much of strychnine then as he does now, he would have made an analysiir'to
see wheffier strychnine was in the body. 7^ great questSon Hiftt T propomftABd iW'yoer
donsideratibn was, whether Cook's 'symptoms were consistent wifft stryehnSne, ana;*1f
they were not, then the conclusion Wotdd be in fovour of the prison^; but if toey^eve
consistent with strychnine, then you are not upon that alone to find a ^vwidiet or ^tdllv
against him'; but you are to consider the other evidence, andseewhetiier the deriih
arose from strychnine or not. Dr. 'Wrightson ' i» recaHed*, and fte says tUat^ in Ma
o^inioh, when strychnine is entlirely absorbed* In the systein it fir dHhsed equiA^
throughout the entire sy stismf. ( 7^e eeidknce o/^Dn 1P9igHt»dn iffa^'tHen read ftjr Mr L&rd-
tf^.) Dr: Wl-i^htson is a phfHdsbpher, and, as amate of* aiiienc<i,- he'^peaks' wftk caution^
ilttd yott liave heard his evidence. ' He^ sayd thkfif tNe^ ■rinifBom- dose wdre' taken aoll'
cient to destroy life, and then a long interval elapsed between the talHng of t&ifr pc^unt
d^d^dfeatii, tm morii c»inp1ete Wbtird'lte tiie'ftbMei^tUm, a^d'^tbeliss^ chairt««itte'W«Qld
lie ef finding it;inth4stoiach.' • *• ' *;

^r. Serjeant S/iee,-^l, think he.^d he woujd expect ib find .;i in the spleen, fheVtrUtt
nd the blood.. "^. .« ., ■ . . ,' ^r r , ,.,

Lord CAjwaxxAitr- jrea{(/f^ I abaii^kwk <fai} ifc.«]i9^wheKi^ |fi the.|yi^ij9eU| the iive^fHd

Then comes Catherine Watson, and she says she Hves at Oarnkirl^'atta^'^UaikfMKir
(The emdeaee<ifVathierkm:Wmtek W€ie thm^rmihy JtoiE <tf i i rfi » :>' •< ">« i •«. jA

Then comes ' Mr. @H«er PembM4on;> . LieotUrer . on (AmAoBiy ati4^iMaBAi. CoUt^wrBr-
anagiiam, sod Surgom «i^!the <6eneMl Mioi^pitiiii ^mt^JjoMikipftkmmmi JfiL FiSiiMir*
(saMnw;) , The ^vddenae' of >tiiir'W«tBetB MSiii»f gMs to dMnsi^tkaa^iiin l|ki mitiimylwi
^«!a«iiia«iott of the iMidy at that 4i«aa'»w»'a»t.«sg.iKnrii»<«*iHf, MlnillicanH^gbMliifit

ths^UoadJ'

IfoftUeprl-

hmk been iMlliedb tlAnt gtn^iaoa, I0 tbe<dp9e pithe m^oftl ovid^nce onbebalf of tbe prw

' ' ' The t}onT^th^ ad^cwrnedfiA' a^orttSm§» •-.

.^.GaDtlemaa of the Jbr^yJiaving finished the mediGal eyxdence adduodd 00 behalf d^
-^^.pruanev, we now 04Mne to witaesa^ wh.Q speak to facts, and th« first is Henxy
Klatmewfiyiand ha jaya, ^ I am inspeotor of poljl^oe at the Eturton Sqiiare Railway Station^
X,iVM stationed them on Monday tiae 19th of ifoyexpber Jast. At two o'clock in the
^£temoon of that di^ a train len London which would stop at Ri]geley» Ko train aftei}
th^it.hoiur stmps at Ungeley/' Novyhe could not have gone by that train, for hejwaft
pfin'in Lonoon after. that hour, rfo train after that stops at Bugeley; the expsess,
which does not stop at Eugeley^ left at five in the afternoon. It was due at Stafford as
lortj/^twA minutes ^st eight, and it did not arrive till forty-five minutes past eight,
^fherafor^if the pnsonar went by the express, he could not well have been at llugeley
b^ffose ten. o'clock, for it.- is ten miles off. Whe^er there is any intermediate mode ef
g^titiag on by means of Lichfield or Birmingham may be doubted. I think it may b<i
probably taken that he went by the express.

>.> J pii ffa fioster was.Uiep.cattedi YoiLseethat the medical witnesses for the prisoner^
J[i0wever strong, say that Cook was in very bad health before this, and to show that he
.WS'in bad hmuth this.witBCS» is called. {HiaLorcbh^ read- Mr, Foster's evidence.) J
mast sa^ thi». is very slendejp evidence io show tha* he was in. a state of healtli M'hieh
might produce tetanus or any such disorder as has been described. All the witness
iWn spank tp i»sa(.aick headaeh e on tfaie oocasimi that he mentions.

':Tnea Geong* Myatt isi called^ wbo is one of the persons-yeii will remember who was
.«i«&e RsiV^en^Hotel oa the Saturday nijght, having been in^the room when the brand;^
lind*«srt^'Waa taken by Coek. (His JLordsh^ read the emdenceqf George Myait.^ Now,
ttie materiality of the evidence of this witness seems to be to show that Palmer could not
']W>ro left^he roms whexe they weiw sittings tQ have, brought any such ingredient as sug-
jgBa<nd|rfCTd»to. have giyea anything of that, sort; to Cook In the evening. .Bis evidence
.^pon that sub^eet isat>vaxianee wi^ the evidence of the witnesses for the prosecutipi^,
Jinil is-not eonsistent with Mrs. Brooks's evidence ; but you will have to judge between
tjimn': that.tiicre.wa§ thistsign whtoh is described by the prosecutor's witnesses this dv!^
j^aa oefori obenatee \ that Qaok. did drink of his brandy-and-water, and immedi&tel^ comr
I^Maedr.that there was stanethiag m it^that it was tasted^ and that oneof them said that
llMte waajiot epumgh theve to judge of it—seems proved b}'. this witness in cerroborat&Mi
-^.thei evidense given- on the past of the prosecution.

. V • John Saqgaaoit ia-the next witness called. ( The evidence of John ScA^eant was then read

jy his Jsondahfp,) Now,. gentlemen, it is for you to say whether this evidence induces

^tt to- betietve that. Cook at the time when. he had these attacks was In bad health, con^

trary teethe evidence you have heard on the other side ;. and as to this cayenne pepper-

.imtV you aee it would haft^e happened .to any of you, if you had had the misfoxtune to

(SwatloW'the amt^ and yoii:woula!have exhibited the same symptoms.

.>f,.. Kext, ^sntlomen, comes a very -material witness, who, if he were to b^ believed^

would be very important, particularly upon one piart of the case, — I mean Jeremiah

Swithi: and you,. having hsaid the. whole of his evidence, the ! examination and cross-

. vaaBiBation, ave to say what faith or reliance you can place upon his testimony, {ffis

• I^ardekip, read 4S portion ff Mr. Smith's evidence.) Now, gentlemen, this would show, If

^rue^. that the genuine and very identical pills that Bamiord had made, and in the state

'|» wbioh he had pr^Mured them, were taken by Cook before Palmer arrived from London

ajt^Bngeley; or at any rate before he came to the Talbot Arms. (His Lordship then read

itl^ (remainder qf the. examination of. Mr. Smith.) Now, gentlemen, it is for you to sur

, whether you can place reliance upon^such testimony. Ton saw how he conducted himself

In thar witness-box, and bow he at last denied that the, si^ature to the instrument whidk

lie purported to have attested, and which he received from the prisoner at the bar, was

llf his handwxitlnff.., He said it was, like it. IpA^t it w;a$ ^ot his handvfriting. . 'Then it

wpears that he did ref$m»«;^/.^andyou<Mre io say whether it was not clieiarl^ for at^t^sting

,|Aat very assignment. The counterfoil of the cheque for 5Z., from Williain t^atmer the

Sisoner, js shown him; and with that piece of paper he goes to' the bank and receives
e 5/. Can you believe a man who i^o disgraces himself m the witness-boi^ ? It is f6r
,yGib.to-8ay what fsdth yjoivean plftce in a witness who, by his own admission, engaged ib
liuoh ftatululei^ pfMMedixfgts. Wto ax« now tip<m vetadty, and yDii' 'tt-e'toMvy wBet^
ymi can betieve a witness who at last acknowledges that he had beenappfied to and* had
'>»een eagai^ iik.p|iimiitiifg TaH'liifRtrantfe en tbe'Ufifr of-Waltec PalBMB,iwka 4)Sd> been a
bankrupt six years befove^ and who had no means of living except by the alle«aaiDe«iOf
•jua.friends: andfui oSliQWance made.to him by the.prisAaer ^ the Jbas., 1 . . , ., .1

Again, he acknowledge^ that.hewaa engag^ in th^ pvoppsal.to insure .,the Bf^ef

•AteB.fdl*>10,CN9Ql«. Baite&beis« at that time e«p.ey*intend4ng the stables of.lJb^ prispi^er At

. Ibe bar, fivii^ inlodgiiKi^ at.fi«» 6«f. n^wefih^ f^jiareiktly Jiavipg no.pfop^rt]^, and not,14i)g

.idependiog apouihis^U^y^hls life :m^ tQ,.be iuAivredn for t;iO,PQQ/r Ibm)j4^ gets l^m^^

j^^ouiledageiU'to.jas msliragoe effioe, and,, with ^.koawledge of these factej^h^ proppses

V]^8Jm4 WAPff <^»w: beifig AMVaiofld aiWPi U« MA^ ()4»if« Ibp.hiukdinitillg vi oi» <w%
i^tiest^tloA to that docoaeiU. GeQtlem^pit of !>»• «c«4it y9f/i a^ lo jiK%iir . Hi» eadfPNi^
would bciJnaterial at to what took place on the Monday ni^tt, becau9* it wq9\A ^M^w.tbN^
the pillfl that Cook took that night were taken at the^ had4>een prmrfd by Bamfora,
aod before the prisoner at the bar had had any opportunity to anostlnite o<h»ra for then
te ^e> \AA'h^tL:'i SMk i§ theeaie with regard to wtet look plaoe on tho^Ttteaday. fir it
stood there, and if it were believed, it would be ^vMmio»in ihimir of ^he prfsoixer'Sfc^ttil^
bar; and yon are to say whether jtoa bellwFe/it» os» if yon di thetis wH^ what eftct-tt^has
Upmn the other teativofiy that haa been brought forward. » '

Centlemen, the cmly other evidence that has been given is a letter wlili^ I hold in Ji^
hand. A person of the name of Saunders was called upon hij( snbpcena, but did .lioi
answer ; but there was given in evidence a letter from Cook to Palmer, dieted 4th Jaottary,
i«&, inithase wieris^Aif Londakip md the latUr). l<ow, gflBtleoMB, it iaolevly> m ftvi-
dance^and is noS riiswstert, thatCookand Pshner the priaoMr had InnsMftions in betliqp
t %utii nr, bKt there jaalso-evidence given that the prisaaer«t thehvfaMivwryiafva
pMmaimry dealings with winch Cook h^d no cs— em he had bo w awe d Aoaaiargaan—
htm Pntt and Wright tq^nhiUa wMeh purpaatod to ba aoeepted by liiia afeothor^ i>«t
«hiQh wese in fact foigsries. /");>

: (Hawv gentienuBytus^is the evidence on the posttof tho'pirisBnnr at the-bat. YoniMe
toaay Iwiv-ikr'thatraffeBta,; in yow opialon^ the «aae iMdo \j thoeipeosiMxitioii. - Am Arm
the peeuatery trsneasHiMs between the parties aoDS ooBOeraiad, yon .wiU •hstrvaifcatrite
aaae remains unelmnged^aBd with laspeotto the motive tisstf tfaa pr is onaf aight bang
batn actoated fay; bat, tinni gentlswain, eoaies that-mest . impoj et But q wiwl l a a , whithfB
tha.siyamtaam m thedeodlssad were eaasiatent with dea<h -i^Y peisoning by atiydmiliiii
Ifoa wilf any whethev.yovr epanion opoB* that-snlQeet is attend by the evMoMefiiicn tm
tile «Hrt«f-«if psisoiieiv- : (Several of thcwi linf ama nt s Had on the part «f tise priateer wUM
toi.Mmit' (a i rt i iMgh ,ietf eoaneyyonwiU/ torn rrtmr ewn.JudgtiieBtwpDB it> tfai^ thsatf
miptana were consistent with ftryehnina, aUno<igh» in the Absence ji/evidenee to show
inat strychnine was administered, they would not come to such a conclusion. . ,

Then, with regard to the facts of the case, yon have the witness Myatt, who gives •
different aceount of what took place at the Baven, when die brandy-and^water was si^-
posed to- hA«>e'heeB dosed-) and you hsive the w it aes s J iM ns ml ah. Smith with ics y ssl to
what took place when the prisoner returned i^m London to Bogelsy on the Meadqr
night. You win say whether you can rely- npe* that, so as to. t^BE.fm^ opiidon -|hat
you had formed previously to that evidence being given. The condniot of the priaoner
remains with no answer whatever giv^n to it, with regard to what took place about
tta anxiety which he dii^yed to have the body speedily fastened up, with respeet to the
betting>bO(^andirlthvespeot>tO'the tamppring with the postboyv and with respsft to
the tampering with the coroner. Gentiemen^ above aU, no erpianalion has been given
of the stryclmine porehased on the Tuesday morning, which it has been proved he pur-
chased, and which proof stands uncontradicted ; no evidence has been given of any pur-
pose to whidi that was to be applied, and no explanation has been given of ^diat becfeme
of that poison. . .. ,.

Qeattomen, the oss» is now in yoitr famids; and, unless upsii- the fart of liw psaaeedtimi
• dear conviction has been brought to your minds of the guilt of the prisancc, it kk<ff9m
duty to acquit him. You are not to proceed even upon a strong suspicion ; there most
be the strongest conviction in your minds that he was guiitv of this offeree ; waA. if
tiiere be any reasonable doubt remaining in your mind, yon will give him the benefit e^
tfast doubt ; bat if yon come to a elear «Ofrvletiott that he was guilty, yon will not hn
dateived from doing your duty by any censidenatiods such^ aahavo bean suggested to jgm^
You will remember the oath that yea have taken, and vou will act aocordimdj^
Gentlemen. I have performed my task; you have now to discharge yours, and may Goa
direct you to a right' finding. « . >

31r. Serjeant Shee.—Yaar liOrdshjp stated to ^e jury that the onesflou for them fe

Consider was, whether' the evidence which has been 'brtt^'^t'flhrwafth— . • « .«

Lord Campbell.— That is a question.' '*' ■>*.'. •...-

Mr. Serjeant S^«.— Your Lordship has not put onv oth'er,-^wheiher the evidence ihil
hhs been brongirt forward is consistent with ^ death of Co<4c by stMhmue. I autanii
to yuur LotdsUp thatthat Isnot tte'qdestion wbich'Ought to hesnhUBmed^ta<thoittn^«i<i

> Lord 0Aam«u«r^^8et{eatit^8Me, tins do "nttifAe quMdan) that i iwveJnshasittsd 4o4h^
jufy •; -it is «i qnestieni v % taUrtheni that 'unitsft ihey 4onsidaired that Urn ayniftsm unapi
oQDsistent with death Iqr s^jrehnlno they q«^ to aequit the pii^onejr.

. ^ Mr. SefjetfHt Shet^ -rit.ls i^y d^tyiS^y; X'Ord, no^to b^ 4^terTed,by any esjiressli
displeasure at my stating it; 1. am accountable not only' to your Lordslbips, but *
accountable to a muchlirgher 'ttWunJt'; and"! tni t^ouiiS td' stffc&ft to^ouWhtl'
to me to be the proper qneStiWk t6 b«! iWl td the Jui^ in tSii^ e«s<J^Tt'b jyoiir'
to ovemite it if ytu tbink'priper. f nbmitl* yoi^ Irfirdshipa tbatr

^<^«Hb^'tkf^sy!ti)9«ifti^^c»i[afe"i^»^^ ^^i^<i6tiiiHmi 'Mtk^^g^m^'^i i tt ^iyt m^ M^

t&%hfMAt iUaVifo iydttf Ltrt^fllit^J

Mr. /a/w?s.-^Just so, my Lori;^ f"aid'i{6'i-^!ik6 'tb' Mt'fer^^V^eJ'tJU^ 'tfet^ W'^m^ ^W
immkmh'at^'^Bmdehm the torife6rier.' ■ ' " •• •• • ' ''''■ '^ "^'■" '*'- '-^'X-l'"'^'

,.,]y|jf,,i^fff;^ S/i^c^TrrH 18 up |7ep^p>ti4aUQ^ of, the spoechatAU* , , .• /' o j , . < . , • ,-«

'• ^licvd <)iUHPBBLii.-HQeiitleBien of'the Jntyy Idiftnot^stibiitil to'<}rotto(<)bstjtih^)qnestioA
9|Mnoitifadch:i3WliweKtdi<it'iil«HMiwa8 to tomirds wheUidxt.lilue ^B^aMytiiiaoiDfiOoelcf'weili
OQCiiiBtpitr \inti^ itoitb > by.-stiyoVisiiierbttt' I ftaid* 'di&6 ilhat iraa >al iiiiost^.-nMLte3ni , quttljipl
fitr ^yovt; ^^ I detired yovk to cJonsidec that question vrith a idew to gmd«. yoiir jwdgwwi^
AS tQdrtottep he-: died>fironi' natural disease, or whether he. ;d|d idord < cUe; by {lai^An^ib^t
strychnine administered by the prisoner. Then I went on to ffigr'tfaai. ifryoiLvireirttiiof
oplnioii that 1^ symptoms iWigre eonbistent with death fvotik stryioMiue, jrou: s^tcmtQ. go
•a tto cdnsider thie «^ber evidence giv«n in the case^>whet3ifir/BtiycfanifbD iBod/beod
adtolnfetwed to him ;. an^ whether strychnine had' been adrainistcraBd ta hlw/hjri *U*
piisdner'at' tire bair;; and tiiose are the questtons t^at I again pilt .to ybvw. If yoor* ocms
ta the 'CQColoflioii that <t|M»e* symptoms were eonsistent vath the strybhnhae, do nyad
THdiere fmok ifaeevideH^etihatit was stryohnme, anddA ^oabelibyeithlLt tfaat-stTryqhniite
was admhiMt^ed by t^e prisoner at the bar? Do not &id;ayiNKJtiotsJ>f^/«$funlQ8S.yx^
litdtove that thid ^sttyvhniuerrwaviipKtrainistehiedMte ishmdaci&aedMyAh^ piiB6aer>aut<the
IMM^." But'if yoab^Aidreithot; itis^yoarduty^rtb Gkid and; mantto find A^;v«ifaioi>of:^itf>Ajoi

"' Thi 'tterh'bf iheAi'reiibni.^OemettteH' y'Oii'Hfiirbe tod''«ri6ttgll'*t6-^edh^?«e^ iVftt*

verdict. '^ :' ' ■'■'■■ ' ■•••'■ ^ -•■■■■ '■ ■ - r-^'---.i'^;.*^>rv'.r.-...v ^^^rT^

,. T&e ^^emn^—y^e y^ish to.retire, my, JiPrd,, ,^, .... ,. ,. .,, .^.,,, . ,, „. ^ , ,. .. . j.

. The jnity i«tlpedrat ei^Jteflu jainwte&.pssfc two^ wid r#ui9»ed .in^fco-Courit 'at t^veei^ty*

fiKtr^n^uies to fovrk.- / v: •-• •< •>■ . ••! --u ■' . ; -. m .i ' . ,:;,;. .•-.'■'.'

• ThejnryhavftigiitifiWirea'to theirmimetf^ ' '- - . ' ' - '• '- ; / ' :^'fi
/ The Clerk pflMArrdij^ i?i'id—GeiitIemeii, have you iigrfeed ujjcm j^oui* verdkt?
J%e i*br«n!af».--We,hay.e, • • , , .'^ ',.'■.' ,-..

Tk^ Clerk of tke^Arrtii^^tui.-*^Da you find thejlrisoiieff^ Guilfyw Nat •Chdltyf
*. 7%e J7brtfrwa»i.— "We iSnd the prisoner GUTLT^. . ' ' : ' '

.-* 5rAe C^crA o/* <Ae -4rrfl^n«.— Prisoner at the bar, you stand' conyjc^ed of , the crime
af wUful murder; wht^t have you to s^y why the Court shoujd not pass sentence of
death upon you according to law ? The prisoner mctcle no answer. ' , .. ./^

.: Xbensnal proclam^tittL i&t siieaee havings beesi-made^ and- ik% Judges having put on
tbe black oaps,

-., XiOrd Campbell said :— "William Pahner, after a long aiid ' ihipartial trial you b4ve
^en coayicted by a jury of your country of the ci^ime of wilful murder. , ju that verdiot
my two learned brothers^ who have so anxiously watered this triiU^ imd myself eotinly
etttttfur, aijd consider that verdict altogether satisfaoteii^y: Tlieoase is Attended with
siich circumstances of aggravation that I do not dai* to touch uboii them. Whether it
is the first and Only o#erice'of ttlis^sbrt wHifeH yotihaV^'iConindtted, is . certainly known
aQly.tO:.Qp4 ancl yoiir 9W|i cpnscienq^. It 1$. 9cldppc^ thi^ 'su(^ a foodiliarity with the
means of death should .Ibu^r^liqy^l^ withput.'long ^i^\^pji^^i})ii%^^Qv,i^^ of whic^

you have been found guilty your life is forfeited^^, Tpu.pi^ustj^pare to,.diio,i ^V^^^ ^st
^aft, as you can expep^^Jip na^P^lf:, Jn.tilw? ^^f?4jiy9^^^^'' ^y repentance .of you/ ^yjmes,
^»k tp obtiviu naei^^y fnojp.. AlfMelii^ X»^ jnlit% r^fii, pf PjarJi^j^ent ^^^ which .xw
hav?r3ipea-tnedj>;iiiid>iHider<whih^ yoti hanre :been^ib«<ougihA.-tOi.<&ejhMr'.;edf fhislGo^
jHmrowsMqilett^ginrteileaTerT^'j&e^CdttJtrftOidij^ ^wWeMHOl] cir-

«eilifttaiie«9 ilHklt'bd^^e^^ cddiet ^Itfe^i'lhidi jlii<tsdletl(hi' ef tli« Osntralf CrimlMd
Court or in the couniy/««1i(9r6 1^6 otffelid #a^'fc?o6i?rfuittW: • IF^ flrfttt<hatl,*ftrtf ^ Vafcfe^

>^th9t
_ ^ _ ^^^ , ^^^ ^ _ _^^_ ^^ _ ^ _^ jt

iikjKiU i>^JB%«».il»»tjFi*tft^€3i;/ir'^rW ^'^cll •*»

pffiBmse;|rMI)ftdet8ftM>«iid 9iMisbedk/>£k^ev,eC(jMrtfe|ieei.pQiip9B -M^^^r*^ ^:^

:QI2S tTRIAL OF WILLIAM PALMER.

•rdaliMd by FnnridaiBM Umt Hmm amiieaiii for tiMMfetyof VtoanBtunfl, far d eJ ep Umg
and pnniflhiii^ thote who administer them. I again implore you to repent and prepare
fiir the awftd change which awaitB you. I will not seek to harrow up your feelings by
any enumeration of the circumstances of this foul murder. I Will content myself
now with passing upon you the sentence of the law, which is, that yon be taken hence
to the gaol of Newgate, and thence remoyed to the gaol of the county of Stafford, behig
the county in which the offence of which you are justly convicted was committed; and
that you be taken thence to a phuoe of execution, and be there hanged by the neck until
you be dead ; and that your body be afterwards buried within the precincts of the prison
in wliich you shall be last confined after your conviction ; and may the Lord have mero|r
upon your soul. Amen !

The iNcisoiier was immediately removed from the duok.

"Mr. Jame9.—I have to apply to vour Lordship that the bills of exchange wMeh hsv«
been given in evidenee and provea to be forgeries -may be impoiraded by year I«oid-
ship*s officer.

Lord Campbell. — Be it so. (^Tummpthm to the Jury.) Gentlemen of the jury, I
beg in the name of the country to return to you the warmest thanks which you deserve
for your valuable services, xour conduct upon this trial has been most exemplary. I
regret exceedingly to think of the privations that you ha't e suffered, and of the loss to
which you may have been liable. 1 believe that you are all engaged in business, and the
most serious loss and inconvenience must have arisen to you ; but I sm sorry to say tiiat
I have no means whatever of remunerating you for that loss. I can only hope that yoa
will be rewarded by Ihe recollection of the uiithful discharge of your duly.

I beg also to return our thanks to the Sheri£b of the City of London for the admirable
manner in which this trial has been conducted, both as regards comfort and decency ;
and I think that they are justly entitled to those thanks whicn I now offer them.

LONDON : 7BIIITED BT WILLIAM CLOWES AND SONS, STAMFORD ffTSEBT,

AND CHABINQ CBOSS.